Manchester United Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2015 Mod Note Post #2331

Lord TSC

glued wrote: »

Ogden isn't really a reliable source. I suspect he's getting his information from the same person that is constantly running to the press every time he sees an opportunity for himself.

Unless I see Ducker and Ladyman post the same stories at the same time as Ogden, I tend to ignore him. He's been woefully unconnected since LVG came in and Moyes left.

The_Kew_Tour

Wohaaaa

Lads lads lads.

Seriously, things are bad on the field, yes, very bad even, hellish, but we ain't a sinking ship.

We have sponsorships coming out our ass, the club has never been healthier. Get the new man to be the guy back winning us trophies and we be fine.

No guarantees in football and maybe we could end up in league 1 down the line, but at this moment in time I think it's just a rough patch every club from Barcelona to Munich have experienced.

Look at them now.

Mitch Connor

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Wohaaaa

Lads lads lads.

Seriously, things are bad on the field, yes, very bad even, hellish, but we ain't a sinking ship.

We have sponsorships coming out our ass, the club has never been healthier. Get the new man to be the guy back winning us trophies and we be fine.

No guarantees in football and maybe we could end up in league 1 down the line, but at this moment in time I think it's just a rough patch every club from Barcelona to Munich have experienced.

Look at them now.

Money is useless if not used correctly, and United are not using it correctly.

Whatever about the issues with thefirst team; just look at the academy.

Neville, RVP, Fletcher all having their kids in the City academy - while all were United players. That is a fairly fooking damning indictment of the quality of the United academy structures - when our own players, two of which were products of the academy - rate City's above it.

McClair left his rle as academy boss at the start of the year and no replacement has been named - we currently have no one in charge of an academy structure that is evidently poor to begin with.

That is, to me, shows a damning lack of effort, care or vision at the club. As long as sponsors are signing up, the people in power consider everything to be ok - which simply isn't the case.

Then look beyond the youth team - what is the commonality it football style and ethos between Fergie, Moyes and LVG - cause ot me the lack of it shows the club has little vision in terms of where it wants to be in 5 or 10 years time. There is no thought, no proper thought, behind the transfers either. Di Maria signed and played in 4 or 5 different positions - because LVG had no fecking clue how he wanted United to play, never mind how he wanted Di Maria to play.

To claim everything is great because we have sponsors paying loads is an incredible thing for a fan to say. To be so blinded that Mr. Potato is proof of how healthy the club is... wow.

beno619

beno619 wrote: »

Thought CBJ did well today.

I think were stuck with Van Gael, so ill just be crossing my fingers he's seen the light with regards to Ander and Morgan.

Made a massive difference

First time in a long time LVG has picked the best 11 available to him

sky88

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Money is useless if not used correctly, and United are not using it correctly.

Whatever about the issues with thefirst team; just look at the academy.

Neville, RVP, Fletcher all having their kids in the City academy - while all were United players. That is a fairly fooking damning indictment of the quality of the United academy structures - when our own players, two of which were products of the academy - rate City's above it.
.

On this I think it's due to were they live. In England you can't go outside a certain mile radius for kids to play football. United a acamedy falls outside their radius that's why they play for city

SlickRic

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Money is useless if not used correctly, and United are not using it correctly.

This is the crux of Utd's issue.

Look who Munich, Barca and Madrid buy, and look who Utd buy.

Look at the academy setup. Who is coming through? Why not?

The superclubs are running away. Utd should be in that category given the resources available; make no mistake. But they're not. And it's actually quite a terrible failure that they're not.

The_Kew_Tour

Mitch Connor wrote: »

To claim everything is great because we have sponsors paying loads is an incredible thing for a fan to say. To be so blinded that Mr. Potato is proof of how healthy the club is... wow.

I never said everything is great, at all

However, it's not all doom and gloom.

We have underachived the last 3 years, but if we get our act together we can get it back to where it should in the long term.

People are just saying things that may or may not be true, to have pop at the club at too, which only odds fuel to the fire, that does not need it.

Mitch Connor

sky88 wrote: »

On this I think it's due to were they live. In England you can't go outside a certain mile radius for kids to play football. United a acamedy falls outside their radius that's why they play for city

The United players live further than 90minutes from Carrington (where the United academy), but within 90minutes of Carrington, where the City academy was?

Also, I believe that rule was done away with a couple of years ago when the new academy structure (for England) was brought in.

The kids were at the City academy because their parents thought it better, nothing to do with any rules you could use to excuse United.

Flint Fredstone

SlickRic wrote: »

This is the crux of Utd's issue.

Look who Munich, Barca and Madrid buy, and look who Utd buy.

Look at the academy setup. Who is coming through? Why not?

The superclubs are running away. Utd should be in that category given the resources available; make no mistake. But they're not. And it's actually quite a terrible failure that they're not.

Convincing a multimillionaire in his 20s, with possibly a young family, to move to rainy Manchester ahead of Barcelona, Madrid, Munich, Paris etc is always going to be a problem though.

United never have much of a problem snapping up the hottest property in England but they always did when it came to players from the continent. That can't be changed.

TheDoc

Sand wrote: »

Hardly - Woodward doesn't set the tactics or pick the players or run the coaching sessions. His performance is judged by the Glazers on how he runs the club business and revenue. And he has been dominant in that arena. Which is the only interest the Glazers have in the club. And that's not even a bad thing assuming they leave the football business to the football people at the club. Which, by and large, they have.

That success and revenue generation will start to dip if the team continue to be unsuccessful in the longterm. So as always, the onfield success of the club is very much tied to the off field success in terms of revenue generation.

If Van Gaal is sacked, that is two for two under Woodwards stewardship whereby the club has not been able to get back on track. And it will be more of an issue this time around considering the investment that was backed for Van Gaal.

The revenue generation that Woodward oversees is very much his ace in the hole. But it's entirely based on having a successful football club. Especially as the club push their expansions into Asia and America and India, where fans there without lengthy following, can change club allegiance season to season based on whose doing best (not all obviously, but there is a clearly large portion)

While his role might not be in the firing line, his responsibilities regarding the first team will very much be should Van Gaal fail to turn this around.

Mitch Connor

Sand wrote: »

Hardly - Woodward doesn't set the tactics or pick the players or run the coaching sessions. His performance is judged by the Glazers on how he runs the club business and revenue. And he has been dominant in that arena. Which is the only interest the Glazers have in the club. And that's not even a bad thing assuming they leave the football business to the football people at the club. Which, by and large, they have.

So if your inferance is that Woodward/Glazers are in charge of the commercial aspects which is ok as long as they leave the football side to football people... who are the football people?

Who is in charge of determining if the manager is doing a good enough job?
Who is in charge or negotiating transfers in and out of the club?
Who is in charge of negotiating contracts?
Who is in charge of hiring the academy staff?
Who is in charge of insuring the future direction of the academy?
Who is in charge of defining and pushing the long term vision of the club?

Answer: Ed Woodward.

So the football side of the club is not being left to football people - Woodward is the one in charge of it all. And THAT, imo, is the problem.

TheDoc

I find those Ogden quotes interesting. Not so much because I believe them coming from him, but moreso because it's an interesting scenario and definitely something that has come across to me at points.

Personally, and this is just my opinion. I'd probably like a clean break entirely from Ferguson, Gill and Giggs. It's becoming evident to me that while the club was obviously a major force under Ferguson, we fell massively behind in terms of structure and putting in place contingencies that most other clubs now take for granted. We had everything moulded in Fergusons image, that he ran in a totalitarian fashion, delegating as he got older.

The problem is becoming evident now as various details start to emerge, and I guess it's obvious to say, this has been a colossus change for the club, that is playing catchup on itself to manage. From independent scouts saying they don't know who to speak to at United, from agents saying there is confusing avenues of communications at the club, our acadamy having no director, our acadamy being arguably a bit woeful and a host of other things.

The immediate questions when Moyes started and as he struggled, was if the shadow of Ferguson was looming above the dugout. And while the camera pans to SAF have been less and less, it's clearly still a thing. Stories still circulate that he has a say in this or that. While it's unquestionable he has pretty much earned the right to sit as a non-exec on the board(and I say non-exec, cause that's what I remember reading him as) but there should be some transparency in terms of his and Gill's involvement.

To be honest the entire lack of transparency about what goes on at that level leaves so much open to interpretation.

Like as a pure example, and just something I've created this second, if it transpired that Woodward has been playing catchup trying to re-organise the club into a more modern approach, that is less susceptible to massive earthquakes when managers leave, and that Ferguson is actively undermining him trying to hold onto the old ways of doing things, my entire perspective of the situation would change.

The lack of perceived vision and planning is as much as a concern to me as the issues with the on field tribulations are. I'd be totally fine dealing with some barren years and disappointments, if I was confident that the club was being reshaped and reorganised into a post Ferguson era, that can then lay inroads into being a dominant force again. Can't say I really hand on heart believe that is happening. And that just encloses us into an endless cycle of short term fixes, massive squad upheavel, and sporadic success(if any)

That we are clinging onto an old model of running a football club, that arguably is becoming redundant at rapid pace, I start to question why is it not evolving into the modern elite style of organisation, and what is blocking it.

*Total conjecture by the way, but its interesting that Ogdon says that stuff, cause its something I've being wondering.

TheDoc

Mitch Connor wrote: »

So if your inferance is that Woodward/Glazers are in charge of the commercial aspects which is ok as long as they leave the football side to football people... who are the football people?

Who is in charge of determining if the manager is doing a good enough job?
Who is in charge or negotiating transfers in and out of the club?
Who is in charge of negotiating contracts?
Who is in charge of hiring the academy staff?
Who is in charge of insuring the future direction of the academy?
Who is in charge of defining and pushing the long term vision of the club?

Answer: Ed Woodward.

So the football side of the club is not being left to football people - Woodward is the one in charge of it all. And THAT, imo, is the problem.

That is exactly the sort of questions I have. And you know, a half decent journalist who wasn't interested in drama headlines might be able to really get into some top notch journalism figuring that out.

Like, does he think he can just manage it all like Gill did for Ferguson, and just doesn't want to admit he cannot, or worse thinks he is but clearly isn't

Or does he want to implement a new structure, but is encountering resistance to change?

It's all conjecture, but it's so annoying not having a clear and concise view on the hierarchy. I can only look with jealousy at the likes of Bayern Munich. A really transparent structure and organisation where mistakes are admitted, information is provided to fans, and they are treated as mature adults. Maybe its the tribal English fan stereotype stopping this sort of transparency?

Our clubs structure to me is becoming increasingly ludicrous as it is left unchanged, and much like how clubs flounder and faulter trying to find their own "Pep" it looks like we are making an absolute meal of trying to replicate the "Ferguson + Gill" combo, which was a total edge case, and no reflection on the mainstream organisational structure of an elite football club.

glued

SlickRic wrote: »

This is the crux of Utd's issue.

Look who Munich, Barca and Madrid buy, and look who Utd buy.

Look at the academy setup. Who is coming through? Why not?

The superclubs are running away. Utd should be in that category given the resources available; make no mistake. But they're not. And it's actually quite a terrible failure that they're not.

That's not true. The PL have made it much harder to win the league which has clearly made it far more difficult for English teams to compete domestically and in the CL. The PL is probably one of the worst leagues to watch as a direct result of money trickling down into the smaller clubs. The academies that Bayern and Barca enjoy would be impossible to replicate in English football. The English league system has far too many clubs and this makes it an impossible task attempting to rival Bayern or Barca's youth set up.

There is also the major issue of the PL not having a winter break with is an absolutely essential issue for some players. The PL has become a hotbed of mediocre talent where above average players from France and many more European countries will come here because they can make more money in the PL.

The top players don't want to come to the premier league. It's boring, gruelling and doesn't nearly have the same draw it once had and none of its best teams can compete in Europe.

TheDoc

SlickRic wrote: »

This is the crux of Utd's issue.

Look who Munich, Barca and Madrid buy, and look who Utd buy.

Look at the academy setup. Who is coming through? Why not?

The superclubs are running away. Utd should be in that category given the resources available; make no mistake. But they're not. And it's actually quite a terrible failure that they're not.

I think it also needs to be factored in however, as a caveat, that the chance of success in terms of titles and trophies is much higher at those clubs, then it is for anyone in England.

The Premier League is extremely competitive and runs in a cyclical nature, which is it's own worst enemy in that regard. Every match is tough and requires full commitment, no winter breaks, expectations from fans in domestic trophies and trying to avoid embarrassment, and essentially 4-5 highly competitive clubs each season who start of with viable title credentials.

Compare that with Spain and Germany where plenty of games are just walkovers, domestic cups are a doddle for the big teams, and with a winter break they come back focused and fresh for the business end of the champions league.

With all the illustrious history of the club, and all the money in the world, there will still be players that might see coming to England for their prime years as a risk, whilst Barca, Madrid and Bayern are a more safe option in terms of securing silverware.

Look at Pedro like as an example. Arguably in his prime years, a fantastic player, and the move he made(even if he moved to United and we were still in the same scenario) he has tied himself into a situation where at least a season of his career, has been a total bust. And at his age, there isn't many left to go. I wouldn't be surprised to see him try push a move back to Barca or to Bayern at the end of this season depending on who comes into Chelsea.

In summary, the calibre of player United, Chelsea and City require to move onto the next level, the true world class players, see England as a massive risk where they will potentially waste some prime years with nothing to show for it.

Korat

TheDoc wrote: »

The Premier League is extremely competitive and runs in a cyclical nature, which is it's own worst enemy in that regard. Every match is tough and requires full commitment, no winter breaks, expectations from fans in domestic trophies and trying to avoid embarrassment, and essentially 4-5 highly competitive clubs each season who start of with viable title credentials.

And yet one club dominated since it's inception until a change of leadership saw the wheels fall off the train.

Utd found it easier to win the PL than the CL for 20 years. The uber competitive PL is English media generated self aggrandisement. "We're so competitive, we can't compete with teams from less competitive leagues" .. Bull Sh*t

Korat

I’d argue that the English league is now a less competitive domestic competition than it was 30-40 years ago when English clubs like Forest and Villa were winning the league and the European Cup with homegrown players.

Leroy42

Korat wrote: »

And yet one club dominated since it's inception until a change of leadership saw the wheels fall off the train.

Utd found it easier to win the PL than the CL for 20 years. The uber competitive PL is English media generated self aggrandisement. "We're so competitive, we can't compete with teams from less competitive leagues" .. Bull Sh*t

The reason why EPL is the most competitive is that the 'top' teams are not getting any better and argueably worse (no arguement needed for us or Chelsea).

Whilst the lower teams have upped their game, the bigger teams haven't and that is what is causing the competitive nature. In Germany, Bayern go after the biggest names from their rivals to ensure that they remain at the top. WHo did Utd buy, Fellani and Mata! One was never going to be more than a squad player and Mata was discarded by Chelsea. Bayern went out and got Lewondowski etc.

Flint Fredstone

It's a competitive league. I'm not sure you're getting what competitive means.

Korat

Flint Fredstone wrote: »

It's a competitive league. I'm not sure you're getting what competitive means.

It's a competition. We can agree on that.

Mars Bar

This thread has been depressing lately and after last nights result, I think ye all need a pick me up. Don't say I never did anything for ye.

Korat

Leicester City have come from nowhere this season with a team of players overlooked by the big clubs and run by a good coach. Watch what happens in the summer as the big clubs plunder their talent to sit them on the bench.

Buying up players from smaller clubs doesn't greatly improve teams like Liverpool or Utd but it castrates the other teams who might challenge them long term if allowed to develop.

It's like the way big companies buy up small competitors just to protect their own business.

IamtheWalrus

Mars Bar wrote: »

This thread has been depressing lately and after last nights result, I think ye all need a pick me up. Don't say I never did anything for ye.

You couldn't be much worse than many of the current crop. Ye got any boots?

Mars Bar

IamtheWalrus wrote: »

You couldn't be much worse than many of the current crop. Ye got any boots?

Copa Mundials coz I'm classy like that. :cool:

Has anyone got a link to that Ogden article/quotes, I would like to read it? Thanks

beno619

TheDoc wrote: »

The immediate questions when Moyes started and as he struggled, was if the shadow of Ferguson was looming above the dugout. And while the camera pans to SAF have been less and less, it's clearly still a thing. Stories still circulate that he has a say in this or that. While it's unquestionable he has pretty much earned the right to sit as a non-exec on the board(and I say non-exec, cause that's what I remember reading him as) but there should be some transparency in terms of his and Gill's involvement.

Is our structure not out in the open for anyone to Google ?

Like any organisation staff can seek advice on issues from internal and external sources, they are as transperant as they need to be.

There is no Fergie shadow.

homerjay2005

something that has gone relatively unsaid is that not only have we have a shambolic run of results, but they have come against some very average teams in a run of games where we were expected to get 14-16 points, but picked up 3.

3 of the games have been against 14, 15th and 16th in the league for instance

imagine what would have happened has this been City, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs etc etc?

4 wins in 17, 14 goals scored, thats relegation form and as I said already, the run of games has been relatively straightforward.

Mitch Connor

homerjay2005 wrote: »

something that has gone relatively unsaid is that not only have we have a shambolic run of results, but they have come against some very average teams in a run of games where we were expected to get 14-16 points, but picked up 3.

3 of the games have been against 14, 15th and 16th in the league for instance

imagine what would have happened has this been City, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs etc etc?

4 wins in 17, 14 goals scored, thats relegation form and as I said already, the run of games has been relatively straightforward.

and yet all that has been required to get enough onside is a blustery press conference and a 0-0 draw at home to the side in 15th. Hitting the post a couple of times is good enough for United.

TheDoc

Korat wrote: »

And yet one club dominated since it's inception until a change of leadership saw the wheels fall off the train.

Utd found it easier to win the PL than the CL for 20 years. The uber competitive PL is English media generated self aggrandisement. "We're so competitive, we can't compete with teams from less competitive leagues" .. Bull Sh*t

That landscape drastically shifted when Abramovic arrived, and further more when City got their investment.

It's true, for a period United had such large swatches of revenue and money they just ought up all the top domestic players, and had a strangelhold on the title. Wenger then arrived and tactical genius made his Arsenal team genuine contenders and rivals, but still struggled to complete on the transfer front, different story for them now.

There is no faff or smoke about the PL being extremely competitive, as it has been crystal clear for about 7 years now, that the challenge at the top of the table for the title has got tighter and harder.

And with massive revenue coming into all the clubs now, the gap between the top 4 and the rest is shrinking, and can only widen back again if the top 4 in England can secure world class talent

TheDoc

beno619 wrote: »

Is our structure not out in the open for anyone to Google ?

Like any organisation staff can seek advice on issues from internal and external sources, they are as transperant as they need to be.

There is no Fergie shadow.

Well thats my point. While our structure is very much out in the open for anyone to see, that does not mean that decision making has heavy influence from elsewhere etc.

I know I've worked in some public companies who by design as supposed to be transparent and open in terms of communication to the stock market and the board, but many and lots of things are not what they seem.

I'm just spitballing, I'm not actually claiming anything, just mere suggestion and thoughts for discussion. I find it extremely odd we have not moved onto a more modern structure, and Ferguson retiring seemed like the perfect time to do it.

Mitch Connor

TheDoc wrote: »

Well thats my point. While our structure is very much out in the open for anyone to see, that does not mean that decision making has heavy influence from elsewhere etc.

I know I've worked in some public companies who by design as supposed to be transparent and open in terms of communication to the stock market and the board, but many and lots of things are not what they seem.

I'm just spitballing, I'm not actually claiming anything, just mere suggestion and thoughts for discussion. I find it extremely odd we have not moved onto a more modern structure, and Ferguson retiring seemed like the perfect time to do it.

It could simply be that the people involved in the club don't know what a proper football structure should look like - given we never looked at one under Fergie.

Discodog

Mitch Connor wrote: »

It could simply be that the people involved in the club don't know what a proper football structure should look like - given we never looked at one under Fergie.

I think that is the key to the problem. The academy was considered the best & produced the class of 92. It's hardly surprising if complacency set in. Then you have SAF & Gill as a total hierarchy. As football changed & continental clubs got stronger, the club were still set in the old ways.

Having a manager for so long has advantages but also disadvantages if new ideas & methods don't get a chance.

TheDoc

Mitch Connor wrote: »

It could simply be that the people involved in the club don't know what a proper football structure should look like - given we never looked at one under Fergie.

Agree. I'd say its multi faceted but without doubt in my eyes, the clubs structure has fallen way behind what would be the standard for an elite club.

I actually didn't realise we had not filled the acadamy director position since McClair left. Only realised it from Sunday Supplement pod last week. That is crazy. He's gone ages!

homerjay2005

weve slipped to 4 points worse off now than we were at the half way point under Moyes, 34 points then v 30 now. another huge note is that weve scored 10 goals less this season and in my opinion, the football was much better to watch that season (as painful as it was), yet people still toe the "moyes season was away worse than this" line.

we were only 3 points off 4th back then, now we are 5 with a goal difference of 13 to make up. the club made the error back then of not sacking Moyes, when it was obvious he had lost the players around November/December.

looks like history is repeating itself and the club learned nothing from Moyes debacle.

glued

Discodog wrote: »

I think that is the key to the problem. The academy was considered the best & produced the class of 92. It's hardly surprising if complacency set in. Then you have SAF & Gill as a total hierarchy. As football changed & continental clubs got stronger, the club were still set in the old ways.

Having a manager for so long has advantages but also disadvantages if new ideas & methods don't get a chance.

For a club to develop a group of players similar to the class of 92 would be a miracle now in the English league system. The structure was ok but the external factors wiped out the possibility of really being able to develop a footballer in the same manner as the class of 92. Sure they should have modernised the recruitment set up and development sooner but realistically a radical overhaul may have not yielded better results.

There is too much money, too many clubs and too many vested interests to ever see an English club churn out youth players in that manner again. Obviously Spurs and Southampton would be the most obvious models to follow and we definitely aren't producing the talent like we should be but I wouldn't lay all the blame at Ferguson's door for that.

bangkok

Mitch Connor wrote: »

It could simply be that the people involved in the club don't know what a proper football structure should look like - given we never looked at one under Fergie.

how do you know this?

it was fergie when he came in that built the whole club up from the academy, what was going on behind the scenes right up to the first team

The_Kew_Tour

Nobody, but nobody is happy with the onfield performances as a whole, nobody.

It's amazing how many twist so much from what others say.

Nalz

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Nobody, but nobody is happy with the onfield performances as a whole, nobody.

What eejit said that some people were happy with the performances?

homerjay2005

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Nobody, but nobody is happy with the onfield performances as a whole, nobody.

It's amazing how many twist so much from what others say.

it appears that the only person who has seen nothing wrong with our performances is Mr Woodward, according to this lot a couple of weeks back -

Red Issue ‏@RedIssue
All today's Van Gaal "genius" stories directly sourced from journos' Christmas drinks with an inebriated Ed 'Idiot' Woodward on Friday night

Red Issue ‏@RedIssue
Woodward also said fans get "guilty" at badgering LVG to "attack, attack" and must be "happy" with the football as he has had no complaints.

Flint Fredstone

homerjay2005 wrote: »

it appears that the only person who has seen nothing wrong with our performances is Mr Woodward, according to this lot a couple of weeks back -

Very selective quoting and hardly impartial when you're leading with Ed "idiot" Woodward.
And he was drunk

Vic Vinegar

More damning stats...

https://twitter.com/AU007MUFC/status/681797889807544320

Since Oct 1st: LWDDDDWWWDDDLLLLD

- Out of Capital One
- Out of Champions League
- 6th in league

glued

LVG should have been sacked but I think it's looking likely that he will get the season to try and sort this mess out.

Headshot

ugh

I think a day doesnt go by without a horrible stat for utd

Its such a downer at the moment for me

bucketybuck

Any concern about the setup at United being lacking may be valid, but it isn't the reason for our ****e performances.

We had a squad of very good footballers but for over 2 years they have consistently played as if they had never trained together. They aren't training on the local park, they aren't working a day job and then landing to the matches an hour before kick off, they are a manager, some coaches and a team of talented footballers that should be showing a lot more than they are.

Football is a simple game at heart and the set up of any football club is very basic compared to other multi-million pound companies. We can improve in many regards but there is no magic club setup that is going to fix our problems, all we need is a manager who can communicate with his squad and get them playing together.

Vic Vinegar

Headshot wrote: »

ugh

I think a day doesnt go by without a horrible stat for utd

Its such a downer at the moment for me

I know it's horrible, but that's the reality of the situation unfortunately.

brinty

Mars Bar wrote: »

This thread has been depressing lately and after last nights result, I think ye all need a pick me up. Don't say I never did anything for ye.

Jesus above Mars bar there a touch of Miley Cyrus off you....

You're being drafted straight into the ladies five a side team...

In fact You're being made captain

Your Airbag

zorro2566 wrote: »

Has anyone got a link to that Ogden article/quotes, I would like to read it? Thanks

According to the beed LVG has asked for 4 weeks to save his job.

Taken from reddit is the following

Dunno if this is new news or the BBC twisting the "we can be back on track in a month" quote but was just listening to BBC 5 live and one of their top news stories at the top of the hour was that Van Gaal has asked the cub for 4 weeks to turn the club around and save his job.


Ogden last night (in his own Independent article and in 2 interviews) has said the club are taking it game by game and will make a decision after Swansea.

My guess is LVG won't be sacked unless getting top four is impossible. Pressure is high and the board have been very quite, at a lot of other clubs he may have been gone already.

Its looks like he will have the window at least. I think LVG is looking at 4 more games at least. Swansea, Newcastle, Liverpool, Southampton. The pool game will be massive.

I can understand with recent results and the brand of football why some fans want him gone but I'm with the ex-players still, give him the rest of the season, I'm sick of this managerial merry go round also.

The risk is we don't look like a settled team and top four could be in the balance. On the plus side we attacked well yday but it was Chelsea and they look very beatable atm. If LVG does turn it around with this window I would be happier, I hate sacking during a bad spell, like its impossible to turn it around.

If LVG did turn it around and we get top four again its still a mark against him as we didn't manage a title fight. It would be interesting to see if the club then sack him or give him another season. Jose could be in another job by then. Fine by me, not his biggest fan but he is quality. I'd rather LVG or anyone else suceed at UTD first.

Shanotheslayer

Mars Bar wrote: »

This thread has been depressing lately and after last nights result, I think ye all need a pick me up. Don't say I never did anything for ye.

Right Lads, I'm the new Manchester Fan here :pac:

paulbok

brinty wrote: »

Jesus above Mars bar there a touch of Miley Cyrus off you....

You're being drafted straight into the ladies five a side team...

In fact You're being made captain

Any injuries we should know about?

Rayne Wooney

Van Gaal has put way too much apparent importance into the word philosophy

Clubs chop and change playing styles all of the time and see success, having tunnel vision for managers who like possession would be a big mistake. I'm not sure if Pep is the real deal yet but would rather him succeed or fail at us rather than go to City and take over Manchester, if he is out of reach then Jose is next up without a doubt