Even I, as a less thoughtful fan

comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 3 minutes ago

The latest issue involving Ashworth, whatever the reasons, is a worry, especially if Sir Jim believes splitting responsibilities between Brailsford, Berrada, and Wilcox is a viable option to a specialist DOF. My concern is that this approach feels no different from what Utd endured under Arnold and Murtough or even Ed Woodward. Football operations should be managed by professionals who know and understand the game, the "best in class"; otherwise, we run the risk of being in constant disarray.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree it's a worry, but on the narrow point of 'moving away from a specialist DOF'... it's important to acknowledge that a lot of people with similar job titles do different roles at clubs. (In fact, illustrating the fluidity and vagueness of these things, Ashworth's job title wasn't DoF, as you wrote, but Sporting Director.) There are some sporting directors who are recruitment specialists, others who are all powerful in running the club. Ashworth was evidently a guy who specialised in ensuring organisational structure and decision making processes were optimised, rather than being an authority figure who made big unilateral calls. I felt comfortable with the idea of having someone like that keeping the machine well oiled. But if Berrada is a skilled administrator who understands the football business and knows the areas where his colleagues' expertise trump his own, and if Wilcox is overqualified for the narrower role he had in the original team, then it's not a given that we need someone with Ashworth's specific remit.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 43 seconds ago
It's not often I disagree with you RR, but I do on this.
He had two lots of people under his care, the staff and the customers.
It doesn't appear as though he has treated the staff well.
Or us the customers, the price rise was bad enough, but to include children and OAPs was more than a little mean.
You are far more erudite tham I am RR. But the two points above outweigh the good as far as I'm concerned.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't see much disagreement between what you've said and what I've said, 52. I haven't attempted to sum up INEOS in good/bad terms. I've just tried to summarise what we know about them and a range of possibilities as to how it might play out. But I'm not at all keen on the cut-throat approach to business, nor the arrogant communication of decisions to employees and fans.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough

I did flag at the time that based on the way he ran Ineos, he would not be an ideal person to run the club.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 9 minutes ago
"Which is fine, but I’m still going to do it"

Refreshing honesty around the time-honoured 'ignore counter arguments and repeat original statement' stance!

'the haven’t improved much at all at Nice, who participate in a league which you’d have thought would be easier to rise up the table over the course of half a decade'

Maybe. I don't think either of us are well placed to pronounce on how Nice is run. Nor how easy it is to establish a team as a consistent force in French football without PSG-style financial doping. (In my observation, PSG's challengers each year seem to vary, which may indicate that a host of clubs working on a finite budget are building teams over e.g. three-year cycles, and if they get it right they make a push for Europe / maybe event a title challenge at the peak of the cycle.)

Either way, I don't see Nice as a reliable guide to INEOS ownership of United. Similarly, I don't think success at Nice would be easily transferred to Manchester. What would worry me is if there were lots of stories about Ratcliffe/Brailsford being headstrong owners who interfere constantly in decisions and processes that are beyond their competence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

INEOS have taken Team Sky from being the dominant force in cycling to also rans. I know little about the workings of the racing team but in the past they have targeted and secured the best talents and packed the team with quality to become almost unbeatable....to the point where they were despised by cycling fans, so grand was their dominance, so big were their budgets, with Brailsford being a key man.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marginal gains was what made team Sky great

They removed/cut costs on small things and the whole thing came tumbling down

comment by Red Russian
posted 36 seconds ago
comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 3 minutes ago

The latest issue involving Ashworth, whatever the reasons, is a worry, especially if Sir Jim believes splitting responsibilities between Brailsford, Berrada, and Wilcox is a viable option to a specialist DOF. My concern is that this approach feels no different from what Utd endured under Arnold and Murtough or even Ed Woodward. Football operations should be managed by professionals who know and understand the game, the "best in class"; otherwise, we run the risk of being in constant disarray.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree it's a worry, but on the narrow point of 'moving away from a specialist DOF'... it's important to acknowledge that a lot of people with similar job titles do different roles at clubs. (In fact, illustrating the fluidity and vagueness of these things, Ashworth's job title wasn't DoF, as you wrote, but Sporting Director.) There are some sporting directors who are recruitment specialists, others who are all powerful in running the club. Ashworth was evidently a guy who specialised in ensuring organisational structure and decision making processes were optimised, rather than being an authority figure who made big unilateral calls. I felt comfortable with the idea of having someone like that keeping the machine well oiled. But if Berrada is a skilled administrator who understands the football business and knows the areas where his colleagues' expertise trump his own, and if Wilcox is overqualified for the narrower role he had in the original team, then it's not a given that we need someone with Ashworth's specific remit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Berrada is a business specialist with experience in football. If he proves to be a capable football administrator, as you hope, then working alongside Wilcox, who has a proven track record and a close working relationship with Berrada from their time at City, might provide the expertise Utd currently lack. However, this remains uncertain. At City, Txiki Begiristain was as much, if not more, the driving force behind their success as Pep Guardiola himself. Berrada was merely the CEO.

On the pitch, Amorim is experiencing a period of experimentation and adjustment, and it seems the same is happening off the pitch at the same time! If the sporting operations are managed effectively with minimal interference from the Glazers or Sir Jim, it could allow Utd to function like a professional football club with a grownup approach. Time will tell, but the worry will remain until the focus shifts from constant turmoil to positive results on the pitch. Sir Jim must find the right balance, as he is quickly losing the goodwill of the fans.

On the flip side, the Saudis came in at Newcastle and well that’s not exactly going too well bar one season where they over performed.

Berrada was merely the CEO

------------------------------------------------------------------

Wrong again, Vengeance. Omar Berrada was never CEO of City, and in his final role before jumping ship was Chief Football Operations Officer at City Group, before that COO of Manchester City FC. Before that he held more commercial roles but was never a pure finance guy like Woodward or Arnold.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
Berrada was merely the CEO

------------------------------------------------------------------

Wrong again, Vengeance. Omar Berrada was never CEO of City, and in his final role before jumping ship was Chief Football Operations Officer at City Group, before that COO of Manchester City FC. Before that he held more commercial roles but was never a pure finance guy like Woodward or Arnold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Txiki Begiristain was the key figure in the sporting operations. He was the main driving force, yes?

Let’s wait and see what this new duo (Berrada and Wilcox) can achieve, though it does bear a resemblance to the Arnold and Murtough setup, it's a big concern. They are hardly best in class, which is what the club needs.

comment by Romeo Golf Kilo (U22964)
posted 3 hours, 7 minutes ago
At least the Glazers prioritised families
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just like the Tories did

comment by Vengeance (U23079)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
Berrada was merely the CEO

------------------------------------------------------------------

Wrong again, Vengeance. Omar Berrada was never CEO of City, and in his final role before jumping ship was Chief Football Operations Officer at City Group, before that COO of Manchester City FC. Before that he held more commercial roles but was never a pure finance guy like Woodward or Arnold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Txiki Begiristain was the key figure in the sporting operations. He was the main driving force, yes?

Let’s wait and see what this new duo (Berrada and Wilcox) can achieve, though it does bear a resemblance to the Arnold and Murtough setup, it's a big concern. They are hardly best in class, which is what the club needs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You've moved the goalposts from saying Berrada was City CEO and a business specialist with no administrative experience (neither of which are true) to saying that Txiki was more instrumental at City. That's true but self-evident, because Txiki mentored and promoted Berrada.

But you haven't addressed the point that Ashworth was primarily an administrator rather than a guy who has active involvement in proposing footballing strategy or driving recruitment decisions, and that plenty of successful football operations don't have a single person with that responsibility. Indeed, if Berrada's operational experience qualifies him to oversee decision making processes, maybe there was too much overlap in the initial structure. It seems as though Berrada will be a much more sporting-focused CEO than Woodward / Arnold, and that Ashworth was a much less proactive sporting director than some of his industry peers.

The comparison with Arnold and Murtough seems daft to me, to be honest. Murtough was very much an administrator - more along the lines of Ashworth than a very sporting strategy focused figure like Wilcox. Arnold was an accountant where Berrada has extensive operational experience at the best run football club in the country over the last decade. We also have Christopher Vivell as (interim) director of recruitment - a much more authoritative figure responsible for executing a coherent recruitment strategy than the club had in the Woodward/Arnold era.

And of course we await news of whether they are consolidating the team with no one occupying Ashworth's role, or whether he'll be replaced by someone deemed a better fit for it.