Shall we do Norwich scarves again or should we pick another team to help out? Who is struggling financially and have cool colours? One of the colours has to rhyme with the action we want taken so like if there is a team that play in an egg colour, we could have something like purple and duck till ineos get to...
They haven't covered themselves in glory so far that's for sure.
To start the process of looking for a replacement for ETH and interview Tuchel only to stick with ETH with a
flimsy 1 year extension was a huge red flag for me. Doesn't help anyone's cause this and certainly not the manager. He's been a lame duck ever since that came out.
Now to go into the international break with 3 wins from 10, sitting 14th and for them to think that's acceptable again is a huge red flag.
If Brentford beat us next weekend, which is plausible, the whole media are going to say 'what did you expect would happen'.
The more they kick the can down the road the worse it will make them look for me. The situation isn't going to get better. We will win a few games and then lose a few and draw a few. This manager has a plan but for whatever reason it just isnt getting through to anyone. He needs to go.
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
comment by Robbing Hoody - keepy up arbiter. Don’t talk to me unless you can do ten (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
that just takes the biscuit
comment by Robbing Hoody - keepy up arbiter. Don’t talk to me unless you can do ten (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a neuf from you
It's a mixed bag, overall yes its too early to judge but it was always a fear this wasn't the answer and now its becoming very quickly apparent.
Ineos are waiting for Southgate
I think they are doing OK. And they will need years to get it to show success.
Prizing the Golden Goose away from the Galazer family was always going to be a tall task. But this is why we are where we are. Its what all United fans demanded.... that Glazers facked off. And if somebody said 5 years ago that the person who was going to attempt to do this was the richest man in Britain and a United and Chelsea fan (cant have it all) we would have all jizzed ourselves.
However. (There is always one of those)
I personally believe now that Jim/INEOS/Trawlers might not ever own United LS&B and he might stop at 27% and in charge of the football side of the club. The 2 x Glazer execs will make buying them out very difficult and ridiculously expensive. Dont forget Jim was offering around £4.5B for the lot and Glazers laughed that out. They want nearer £10B. And I dont think that Jim has that to spend on another football club. Hes been in it now for nearly a year and the mess United are in has been a eye opener for him and the depth of the job in hand is quite scary. Meanwhile in his other sponsorships like Americas Cup and F1 he has joy and success. Plus I think sailing/F1/Rugby etc... the posh sports.... are more up his street anyway.
They have made a good start with assembling the structure by appointing the right people to move United forwards as a serious sporting club. Just one mistake they have made in all trhey have done is that the Head Coach isnt up to the job and it shows. That shouldnt be a problem for a well serviced machine and changing a dodgy cog here and there to keep it working should be seemless.
"To start the process of looking for a replacement for ETH and interview Tuchel only to stick with ETH with a
flimsy 1 year extension was a huge red flag for me. Doesn't help anyone's cause this and certainly not the manager. He's been a lame duck ever since that came out."
I can sympathise with this, there are lots of things at play here.
- Ten Hag just won the FA Cup, we beat City in a final.
- The club structure has been totally revamped, both giving the chance to ETH and the new team time to bed in before the next coach has it's benefits.
- The candidates available for the role weren't exactly an enticing prospect. For example, nobody wanted Tuchel on this site as far as I can tell.
- Hopefully with some time to settle and review the clubs issues, the board now have a better understanding of what's needed to move forward. Maybe that wasn't the case in the summer, so now Ten Hag can be the fall guy.
- The board would have discussed this with influential players and staff, presumably many of these backed ETH.
comment by Pun (a.k.a Piranha) (U21588)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - keepy up arbiter. Don’t talk to me unless you can do ten (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a neuf from you
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Couldn't let this go unacknowledged.
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Pun (a.k.a Piranha) (U21588)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - keepy up arbiter. Don’t talk to me unless you can do ten (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a neuf from you
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Couldn't let this go unacknowledged.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure how they can be called frauds at this stage.
Not sure why you guys are blaming INEOS when they've only got, what, 27%? The Glazers still have controlling stake, no?
Sir Worzel is taking the brunt of this $hitand the Glazers are laughing.
Or have I misunderstood?
OK, just read RB&W's comment.
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 42 minutes ago
"To start the process of looking for a replacement for ETH and interview Tuchel only to stick with ETH with a
flimsy 1 year extension was a huge red flag for me. Doesn't help anyone's cause this and certainly not the manager. He's been a lame duck ever since that came out."
I can sympathise with this, there are lots of things at play here.
- Ten Hag just won the FA Cup, we beat City in a final.
- The club structure has been totally revamped, both giving the chance to ETH and the new team time to bed in before the next coach has it's benefits.
- The candidates available for the role weren't exactly an enticing prospect. For example, nobody wanted Tuchel on this site as far as I can tell.
- Hopefully with some time to settle and review the clubs issues, the board now have a better understanding of what's needed to move forward. Maybe that wasn't the case in the summer, so now Ten Hag can be the fall guy.
- The board would have discussed this with influential players and staff, presumably many of these backed ETH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed, it's not like we turned down an outstanding candidate.
I really don't get those who think Tuchel is the answer.
Busby's comment is very reasonable. For those who are 'done with the INEOS frauds' on the basis of their failure to sack ETH, I guess my question is this: who do you mean precisely?
- Ratcliffe is the guy who believes in lean, ambitious companies with a culture of excellence, innovation and accountability, and relying on industry leading experts to drive decision making. He didn't make the decision on ETH's future.
- Brailsford specialises in creating a culture of high-performance in sporting organisations, has input in creating organisational structures, and is very clear about not being a footballing specialist. He didn't make the decision on ETH's future.
- Omar Berrada, appointed as CEO by INEOS, would be involved in the decision making around hiring/firing head coaches. But he wasn't employed by Manchester United until 13th July, about a month after the decision was taken not to keep ETH for the time being.
- Ditto for Dan Ashworth, who didn't begin until July.
- Jason Wilcox seems to have been the one who led the review of ETH. He was at that point pretty new to the organisation, working on a decision that would normally be above his pay-grade, and presumably without precise parameters set on the expectations he had to measure ETH against.
So, sure, if anyone here believes that not sacking ETH in June was a black-and-white terrible decision making - not mitigated by lack of outstanding alternatives etc - then you can say Wilcox made a bad decision. I don't think you can say that INEOS made a bad decision, because INEOS was only indirectly involved in it: they are working on restructuring and growing the organisation on a strategic level, and bringing in high-quality people with impressive track records to make footballing decisions. Wilcox fits that description.
And the same thing applies now. INEOS is focused on the strategic long-term picture. It relies on highly qualified sporting professionals to make sporting decisions. If Berrada, Ashworth and Wilcox are running things disastrously, then the worst you can say about INEOS is that they made bad hires when bringing in those three people. But they didn't seem like terrible hires, because they have far more impressive track records than the people they have replaced. However, even if they recruited three duds as CEO and sporting executives (which I highly doubt), that wouldn't mean INEOS are frauds and idiots; it would mean the headhunting advice they sought out from professionals proved to be bad. It wouldn't mean the foundational ideas of the INEOS project (culture of excellence and innovation; accountability; expert-driven decision making; sporting achievement as a core objective) are flawed. It would be a hiccup.
Personally, I think ETH probably should have been sacked at the end of last season, and I believe the only thing that saved him was lucky timing (from his point of view) that the INEOS era hadn't properly started, meaning the club didn't have enough time to profile the ideal coach for the project, didn't have all the key people in place to have input on that process, and therefore wasn't equipped to do the homework to get the right man in.
They have not had any time to turn things around that have been wrong for so many years, but they have already been faced with some key decisions and the way they have handled and executed them would be worrying, showing some pretty poor judgement.
For those who are 'done with the INEOS frauds' on the basis of their failure to sack ETH, I guess my question is this: who do you mean precisely?
____
RR I think you really mean your mate SE85 here. Ive not read or heard anybody else say that they are 'done with INEOS' just because they havent sacked TH yet. Athough it seems we both agree that they should have sacked him by now. But havent for whatever reasons
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 6 minutes ago
They have not had any time to turn things around that have been wrong for so many years, but they have already been faced with some key decisions and the way they have handled and executed them would be worrying, showing some pretty poor judgement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you be more specific? Which key decisions? Who do you mean by 'they'? And do you think these decisions reflect on the whole INEOS strategic project?
comment by RB&W - He kicked lumps out of them (U21434)
posted 43 seconds ago
RR I think you really mean your mate SE85 here. Ive not read or heard anybody else say that they are 'done with INEOS' just because they havent sacked TH yet. Athough it seems we both agree that they should have sacked him by now. But havent for whatever reasons
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I certainly think it's a minority view on this forum, but in addition to SE85, we have the OP calling them 'frauds' and UmaThurmans_BigToe giving the caveat that it's too early to judge and then going on to make the judge that 'its becoming very quickly apparent' that INEOS are not the answer.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by RB&W - He kicked lumps out of them (U21434)
posted 43 seconds ago
RR I think you really mean your mate SE85 here. Ive not read or heard anybody else say that they are 'done with INEOS' just because they havent sacked TH yet. Athough it seems we both agree that they should have sacked him by now. But havent for whatever reasons
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I certainly think it's a minority view on this forum, but in addition to SE85, we have the OP calling them 'frauds' and UmaThurmans_BigToe giving the caveat that it's too early to judge and then going on to make the judge that 'its becoming very quickly apparent' that INEOS are not the answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well rest assured that anybody with a brain really knows that because INEOs have only just started this season and reorganising and running Uniteds sporting club and as a project will take years (2028 they believe) to start bearing the fruit we all want.
Its clear to me and the United supporters I know of anyway, that INEOS is something like the answer we all wanted from the bidding process. Which was somebody with enough expertise money and acumen to potentially oust the Glazers and replace them one day. Lets hope it happens.
Wanting TH replaced is a different matter. Hes been here for 3 years and things are getting worse at an alarming rate.
Think INEOS need more time before they can be classed as failing in anyway ….they are putting in some solid foundations
Yeah they should have sacked ETH at the end of last season but that seems like their only mistake so far but the bloke just won the fa cup and they may have thought a turnaround was about to happen but it looks like he has lost the dressing room….results and performances are just not at united standard
Not sure tuchel is the answer either and I hope for uniteds supporters sake Southgate isn’t either
Maybe need to take a risk on the sporting manager or feel free to shoot me to pieces, the Ipswich boss …to do the job he has done is impressive
Emery is another one and united are united still…he would leave villa for you
They bought Lausanne and Nice 8 and 5 years ago respectively.
Both clubs are not exactly pulling up any trees but maybe they will fare better in the Prem.
Sign in if you want to comment
INEOS
Page 1 of 4
posted on 14/10/24
Explain
posted on 14/10/24
Shall we do Norwich scarves again or should we pick another team to help out? Who is struggling financially and have cool colours? One of the colours has to rhyme with the action we want taken so like if there is a team that play in an egg colour, we could have something like purple and duck till ineos get to...
posted on 14/10/24
They haven't covered themselves in glory so far that's for sure.
To start the process of looking for a replacement for ETH and interview Tuchel only to stick with ETH with a
flimsy 1 year extension was a huge red flag for me. Doesn't help anyone's cause this and certainly not the manager. He's been a lame duck ever since that came out.
Now to go into the international break with 3 wins from 10, sitting 14th and for them to think that's acceptable again is a huge red flag.
If Brentford beat us next weekend, which is plausible, the whole media are going to say 'what did you expect would happen'.
The more they kick the can down the road the worse it will make them look for me. The situation isn't going to get better. We will win a few games and then lose a few and draw a few. This manager has a plan but for whatever reason it just isnt getting through to anyone. He needs to go.
posted on 14/10/24
Too early to judge.
posted on 14/10/24
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
posted on 14/10/24
comment by Robbing Hoody - keepy up arbiter. Don’t talk to me unless you can do ten (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
that just takes the biscuit
posted on 14/10/24
comment by Robbing Hoody - keepy up arbiter. Don’t talk to me unless you can do ten (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a neuf from you
posted on 14/10/24
It's a mixed bag, overall yes its too early to judge but it was always a fear this wasn't the answer and now its becoming very quickly apparent.
posted on 14/10/24
Ineos are waiting for Southgate
posted on 14/10/24
I think they are doing OK. And they will need years to get it to show success.
Prizing the Golden Goose away from the Galazer family was always going to be a tall task. But this is why we are where we are. Its what all United fans demanded.... that Glazers facked off. And if somebody said 5 years ago that the person who was going to attempt to do this was the richest man in Britain and a United and Chelsea fan (cant have it all) we would have all jizzed ourselves.
However. (There is always one of those)
I personally believe now that Jim/INEOS/Trawlers might not ever own United LS&B and he might stop at 27% and in charge of the football side of the club. The 2 x Glazer execs will make buying them out very difficult and ridiculously expensive. Dont forget Jim was offering around £4.5B for the lot and Glazers laughed that out. They want nearer £10B. And I dont think that Jim has that to spend on another football club. Hes been in it now for nearly a year and the mess United are in has been a eye opener for him and the depth of the job in hand is quite scary. Meanwhile in his other sponsorships like Americas Cup and F1 he has joy and success. Plus I think sailing/F1/Rugby etc... the posh sports.... are more up his street anyway.
They have made a good start with assembling the structure by appointing the right people to move United forwards as a serious sporting club. Just one mistake they have made in all trhey have done is that the Head Coach isnt up to the job and it shows. That shouldnt be a problem for a well serviced machine and changing a dodgy cog here and there to keep it working should be seemless.
posted on 14/10/24
"To start the process of looking for a replacement for ETH and interview Tuchel only to stick with ETH with a
flimsy 1 year extension was a huge red flag for me. Doesn't help anyone's cause this and certainly not the manager. He's been a lame duck ever since that came out."
I can sympathise with this, there are lots of things at play here.
- Ten Hag just won the FA Cup, we beat City in a final.
- The club structure has been totally revamped, both giving the chance to ETH and the new team time to bed in before the next coach has it's benefits.
- The candidates available for the role weren't exactly an enticing prospect. For example, nobody wanted Tuchel on this site as far as I can tell.
- Hopefully with some time to settle and review the clubs issues, the board now have a better understanding of what's needed to move forward. Maybe that wasn't the case in the summer, so now Ten Hag can be the fall guy.
- The board would have discussed this with influential players and staff, presumably many of these backed ETH.
posted on 14/10/24
comment by Pun (a.k.a Piranha) (U21588)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - keepy up arbiter. Don’t talk to me unless you can do ten (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a neuf from you
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Couldn't let this go unacknowledged.
posted on 14/10/24
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Pun (a.k.a Piranha) (U21588)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by Robbing Hoody - keepy up arbiter. Don’t talk to me unless you can do ten (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago
Nice are up to 9th in Ligue one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a neuf from you
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Couldn't let this go unacknowledged.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 14/10/24
Not sure how they can be called frauds at this stage.
posted on 14/10/24
Not sure why you guys are blaming INEOS when they've only got, what, 27%? The Glazers still have controlling stake, no?
Sir Worzel is taking the brunt of this $hitand the Glazers are laughing.
Or have I misunderstood?
posted on 14/10/24
OK, just read RB&W's comment.
posted on 14/10/24
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 42 minutes ago
"To start the process of looking for a replacement for ETH and interview Tuchel only to stick with ETH with a
flimsy 1 year extension was a huge red flag for me. Doesn't help anyone's cause this and certainly not the manager. He's been a lame duck ever since that came out."
I can sympathise with this, there are lots of things at play here.
- Ten Hag just won the FA Cup, we beat City in a final.
- The club structure has been totally revamped, both giving the chance to ETH and the new team time to bed in before the next coach has it's benefits.
- The candidates available for the role weren't exactly an enticing prospect. For example, nobody wanted Tuchel on this site as far as I can tell.
- Hopefully with some time to settle and review the clubs issues, the board now have a better understanding of what's needed to move forward. Maybe that wasn't the case in the summer, so now Ten Hag can be the fall guy.
- The board would have discussed this with influential players and staff, presumably many of these backed ETH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed, it's not like we turned down an outstanding candidate.
I really don't get those who think Tuchel is the answer.
posted on 14/10/24
Busby's comment is very reasonable. For those who are 'done with the INEOS frauds' on the basis of their failure to sack ETH, I guess my question is this: who do you mean precisely?
- Ratcliffe is the guy who believes in lean, ambitious companies with a culture of excellence, innovation and accountability, and relying on industry leading experts to drive decision making. He didn't make the decision on ETH's future.
- Brailsford specialises in creating a culture of high-performance in sporting organisations, has input in creating organisational structures, and is very clear about not being a footballing specialist. He didn't make the decision on ETH's future.
- Omar Berrada, appointed as CEO by INEOS, would be involved in the decision making around hiring/firing head coaches. But he wasn't employed by Manchester United until 13th July, about a month after the decision was taken not to keep ETH for the time being.
- Ditto for Dan Ashworth, who didn't begin until July.
- Jason Wilcox seems to have been the one who led the review of ETH. He was at that point pretty new to the organisation, working on a decision that would normally be above his pay-grade, and presumably without precise parameters set on the expectations he had to measure ETH against.
So, sure, if anyone here believes that not sacking ETH in June was a black-and-white terrible decision making - not mitigated by lack of outstanding alternatives etc - then you can say Wilcox made a bad decision. I don't think you can say that INEOS made a bad decision, because INEOS was only indirectly involved in it: they are working on restructuring and growing the organisation on a strategic level, and bringing in high-quality people with impressive track records to make footballing decisions. Wilcox fits that description.
And the same thing applies now. INEOS is focused on the strategic long-term picture. It relies on highly qualified sporting professionals to make sporting decisions. If Berrada, Ashworth and Wilcox are running things disastrously, then the worst you can say about INEOS is that they made bad hires when bringing in those three people. But they didn't seem like terrible hires, because they have far more impressive track records than the people they have replaced. However, even if they recruited three duds as CEO and sporting executives (which I highly doubt), that wouldn't mean INEOS are frauds and idiots; it would mean the headhunting advice they sought out from professionals proved to be bad. It wouldn't mean the foundational ideas of the INEOS project (culture of excellence and innovation; accountability; expert-driven decision making; sporting achievement as a core objective) are flawed. It would be a hiccup.
Personally, I think ETH probably should have been sacked at the end of last season, and I believe the only thing that saved him was lucky timing (from his point of view) that the INEOS era hadn't properly started, meaning the club didn't have enough time to profile the ideal coach for the project, didn't have all the key people in place to have input on that process, and therefore wasn't equipped to do the homework to get the right man in.
posted on 14/10/24
They have not had any time to turn things around that have been wrong for so many years, but they have already been faced with some key decisions and the way they have handled and executed them would be worrying, showing some pretty poor judgement.
posted on 14/10/24
For those who are 'done with the INEOS frauds' on the basis of their failure to sack ETH, I guess my question is this: who do you mean precisely?
____
RR I think you really mean your mate SE85 here. Ive not read or heard anybody else say that they are 'done with INEOS' just because they havent sacked TH yet. Athough it seems we both agree that they should have sacked him by now. But havent for whatever reasons
posted on 14/10/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 6 minutes ago
They have not had any time to turn things around that have been wrong for so many years, but they have already been faced with some key decisions and the way they have handled and executed them would be worrying, showing some pretty poor judgement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you be more specific? Which key decisions? Who do you mean by 'they'? And do you think these decisions reflect on the whole INEOS strategic project?
posted on 14/10/24
comment by RB&W - He kicked lumps out of them (U21434)
posted 43 seconds ago
RR I think you really mean your mate SE85 here. Ive not read or heard anybody else say that they are 'done with INEOS' just because they havent sacked TH yet. Athough it seems we both agree that they should have sacked him by now. But havent for whatever reasons
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I certainly think it's a minority view on this forum, but in addition to SE85, we have the OP calling them 'frauds' and UmaThurmans_BigToe giving the caveat that it's too early to judge and then going on to make the judge that 'its becoming very quickly apparent' that INEOS are not the answer.
posted on 14/10/24
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by RB&W - He kicked lumps out of them (U21434)
posted 43 seconds ago
RR I think you really mean your mate SE85 here. Ive not read or heard anybody else say that they are 'done with INEOS' just because they havent sacked TH yet. Athough it seems we both agree that they should have sacked him by now. But havent for whatever reasons
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I certainly think it's a minority view on this forum, but in addition to SE85, we have the OP calling them 'frauds' and UmaThurmans_BigToe giving the caveat that it's too early to judge and then going on to make the judge that 'its becoming very quickly apparent' that INEOS are not the answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well rest assured that anybody with a brain really knows that because INEOs have only just started this season and reorganising and running Uniteds sporting club and as a project will take years (2028 they believe) to start bearing the fruit we all want.
Its clear to me and the United supporters I know of anyway, that INEOS is something like the answer we all wanted from the bidding process. Which was somebody with enough expertise money and acumen to potentially oust the Glazers and replace them one day. Lets hope it happens.
Wanting TH replaced is a different matter. Hes been here for 3 years and things are getting worse at an alarming rate.
posted on 14/10/24
Think INEOS need more time before they can be classed as failing in anyway ….they are putting in some solid foundations
Yeah they should have sacked ETH at the end of last season but that seems like their only mistake so far but the bloke just won the fa cup and they may have thought a turnaround was about to happen but it looks like he has lost the dressing room….results and performances are just not at united standard
Not sure tuchel is the answer either and I hope for uniteds supporters sake Southgate isn’t either
Maybe need to take a risk on the sporting manager or feel free to shoot me to pieces, the Ipswich boss …to do the job he has done is impressive
Emery is another one and united are united still…he would leave villa for you
posted on 14/10/24
They bought Lausanne and Nice 8 and 5 years ago respectively.
Both clubs are not exactly pulling up any trees but maybe they will fare better in the Prem.
Page 1 of 4