Man Utd stuck in ‘limbo of mediocrity’; Sheikh Jassim offered a ‘unicorn farm’
Manchester United fans are turning on Bruno Fernandes, Ruben ‘Interim’ Amorim, the Glazers and Sir Jim Ratcliffe…
Send your views on Wednesday night’s football to theeditor@football365.com
Get rid of sneaky Bruno
If Manchester United get rid of Bruno Fernandes their problems will be solved overnight!
If you could see his sneaky behaviour on the CCTV around training ground and at the stadium and the often accompanying audio you’d agree.
George
Ruben Amorim: The very worst
As a life-long Utd fan he is the worst manager ever, why play a system that does not work for the players, and keep persisting with it? Enough, get rid now before we get relegated.
Stephen Smith
…So Ruben “Interim” needs X number of transfer windows and X millions of pounds (presumably) to find players who can specifically play in a 3-4-3. Whatever happened to coaching? Whatever happened to improving the players you inherit?
Matthew
…There has been much discourse lately about the Man United squad needing a dramatic overhaul, G Nev saying he needs at least two or three transfer windows, Dave Tickner writing about the requirements of having a 3-4-3 system and the requirements for players in certain positions within that formation.
However, the elephant in the room that has been bothering me is – how come other managers can manage to switch to a back 3 system for certain games or certain periods and the world doesn’t cave in? The most recent time I’ve seen West Ham was their match away to Villa, I hadn’t seen much of West Ham up to that point but they were impressive in that game against a good Villa side and, lo and behold, Potter had switched to a back 3. He didn’t suddenly require 6 new players to do it, he had the much maligned (in an attacking sense) AWB at RWB, Kudus in one of the “two No.10s” roles (as cited in Amorim’s system).
Wolves have also played a back 3 at times, again, no whining about needing specialists in all roles. Antonio Conte did it back in the day using Moses at RWB at Chelsea then again at Inter using Ashley Young at LWB.
If Amorim is so inflexible that he needs such an overhaul to win some matches, maybe United have made another mistake in hiring a manager who’s only success is in a non-top 5 league. Maybe his system just sucks.
Let’s not forget, United are not just under performing, they are barely winning any matches! It’s all well and good for Jamie Redknapp, at the weekend, to say how far off City and Liverpool they are (obviously correct) but are their players worse than Everton’s? After all, they are behind in the table now. Are they really that much worse than Fulham’s or Crystal Palace’s?
It shouldn’t be forgotten that many experts praised United’s transfer window, now they’re all back tracking saying the players aren’t good enough.
Maybe the experience United and Spurs are now having with managers who’s success was built in less major leagues should serve as a warning. Hiring up and comers is all well and good but I’d rather it be with someone who’s made a club in Spain, Italy or Germany punch above their weight rather than someone who’s won titles in a shortest dwarf contest.
Andy MUFC
MORE MAN UTD COVERAGE ON F365…
👉 Ruben Amorim needs way more than ‘two or three transfer windows’ to fix Man Utd
👉 Who will be the next Man Utd manager if Ruben Amorim is sacked?
👉 Ashworth wanted Man Utd to appoint PL boss instead of Amorim before his £25m sacking
The cost of backing Amorim…
Lots of fans seem to have an opinion on whether Amorim should stay or go, but let’s look at the actual reality of the situation and the cost of ‘backing the manager’.
Sir Jim is looking at the prospect of having to find a hundred million squid through transfers, and another hundred million, presumably out of thin air, just to build a squad that is suitable for the Amorim ‘system’, which apparently does not suit 10-15 senior players.
It’s obvious you can’t do this in a single summer window. Even on Football Manager you couldn’t do that in a summer window. So realistically it’s a two summer job at minimum, just to get Ruben what he wants.
And let’s face it, what he wants is going to be expensive. And while it’s nice that an English club has an English (minority) owner. For the foreseeable future, Manchester United will be operating on a budget closer to FC Nice than anything we saw under the Glazer regime.
So there isn’t going to be a Victor Gyokeres walking through the door. There probably isn’t going to be a Goncalo Ignacio either. Or any other Sporting player with an inflated price tag, that will make Ruben feel comfortable.
If we want those kinds of players, Ruben is going to have to find them in a similar manner as Sporting did in the first place. And even then, it’s going to be a stretch that requires a Todd Boehly type owner, stupid enough to pay overs for the players Ruben doesn’t want.
And dumb Chelsea owners only come around once every 20 or so years, so that’s not going to happen either.
And I’m not against making the scouting department earn their money. Nor am I against the idea that the owner is going to have to listen to the scouting department, rather than just overpaying for whatever big name player that has worn out their welcome in Munich or Madrid
But is this something that Sir Jim and Amorim are going to have the patience for?
Is Sir Jim going to accept another season without European football (and the income it provides) while Ruben trains up a bunch of teenagers that nobody has heard of?
And that’s not to mention the massive cost of replacing most of the junior coaching staff with Amorim guys. Because if we are still following the INEOS ‘philosophy’, the 3-4-3 is the style of play that we are going to build the club around both now and for the future.
So it’s a 300 million pound investment to try and make it work, versus fifty million pounds to make your mistake disappear and hope the next guy will be able to turn sh*t into clay?
I reckon Dan Ashworth would have an idea of what direction Sir Jim is heading. And so does the tea lady who got fired to help pay for Ashworth’s permanent vacation from Manchester.
Cliff A, Australia
The Glazers, Ratcliffe and dreams of Sheikh Jassim’s unicorn farm
Ah, Manchester United. A club so vast, so historic, so beloved that it now finds itself perched precariously between the scorching fires of relegation and the icy winds of Europa League irrelevance. It’s a bit like watching the Titanic sink, except instead of rearranging deck chairs, Jim Ratcliffe is here slashing wages, selling lifeboats, and suggesting the iceberg “might actually be good for morale.”
Let’s talk about Sir Jim, the knight who swept in to “save” United with a 27.7% stake. Twenty-seven-point-seven. Not quite a takeover, more like renting the back seat of a bus hurtling off a cliff. And yet, we were told this was the responsible choice, the British choice, because apparently nothing says “long-term success” like crippling austerity measures and the quiet hum of Glazer dividends in the background.
And let’s not forget the absolute farce of decision-making under Ratcliffe’s stewardship. The man didn’t even take full control but has somehow managed to take full blame. It’s as if he’s entered a kitchen, turned off the oven, and declared the soufflé ruined, all while the Glazers keep eating cake in the other room. The only thing more embarrassing than our performances on the pitch is the complete lack of clarity in the boardroom. Who’s in charge? Ratcliffe? The Glazers? Fred the Red?
Sheikh Jassim is probably sitting in Doha, sipping tea, and watching this chaos unfold like a fan at a reality show reunion. One can only imagine his thoughts: “I offered to clear the debt, build a new stadium, and buy half of Europe’s best players, and they went with this guy?” It’s like turning down a Ferrari because you think the complimentary air freshener smells too fancy. But sure, let’s call it a “strategic decision” to stick with the people who once gave us Ed Woodward.
And the worst part? The fans saw this coming. We all knew what Ratcliffe represented: a patch job on a club haemorrhaging relevance. The Sheikh’s vision was too good to be true, they said. But wasn’t that the point? Isn’t football about dreaming big, about defying the odds, about rebuilding what’s broken? Instead, we’re left with an accountant’s approach to a poet’s game—and if we keep going like this, we’ll soon be balancing spreadsheets in the Championship.
What’s truly maddening is how utterly predictable this has all been. Ratcliffe was always going to come in and “optimize,” which in business-speak usually translates to “sell your silverware while pretending the cupboard was always bare.” But what’s next? Naming rights for Old Trafford? A new slogan: “Manchester United – Brought to You by INEOS (Debt Not Included)”? At this rate, I half expect Sir Alex to be replaced by a cardboard cutout at events, purely to save on his ambassador fees.
The contrast with Sheikh Jassim’s proposal is staggering. Here was a man with the vision to make United great again, willing to invest in the infrastructure, the squad, and the ethos of the club. But no, we’re British! We don’t trust ambition unless it’s tempered with a bit of good old-fashioned suffering. It’s as if the board decided that self-sabotage was a necessary tradition, right up there with Fergie time and Arsenal fans singing about us losing.
And now we’re left with this half-measure that pleases no one. Ratcliffe won’t fully take over, the Glazers won’t fully leave, and the fans won’t fully stop despairing. It’s a limbo of mediocrity, a purgatory where the only thing that seems certain is that this once-proud club will continue to stumble around like a toddler wearing oversized boots. Sheikh Jassim may have been a risk, but at least it would’ve been a bold one. What we’ve got now feels like waiting for relegation with better branding.
Meanwhile, we had Sheikh Jassim and his glorious promises of debt-free footballing utopia. No more bond payments, no more stock exchange soap opera, no more excuses. Just shiny new stadiums, shiny new training facilities, and presumably shiny new players, which is helpful when your midfield currently resembles a pub quiz team trying to tackle Enzo Fernández.
But no. We went with Jim. Why? Because we like control. Apparently, the Sheikh’s billions came with too many strings attached—such as ambition, vision, and the horrifying possibility of building a squad capable of beating Luton Town at home. Instead, we’re trimming the fat…and the muscle…and possibly the skeleton, as beloved staff are marched out the door faster than our defenders chasing counterattacks.
It’s painfully poetic, really. We had the opportunity to build something extraordinary, to finally step out of the Glazer shadow, and instead we’re squabbling over who gets to water the patch of weeds in our trophy cabinet. But hey, at least Jim’s commitment to austerity ensures we’ll be able to afford a truly magnificent commemorative plaque when we finally win the “We Didn’t Get Relegated in 2025” trophy.
United used to stand for something. Now it stands for compromise, for mediocrity, for a sad, lingering sigh of what might have been. But hey, at least we still have Bruno Fernandes furiously pointing at things.
Yours in exasperation,
Charly M
MORE MAN UTD COVERAGE ON F365…
👉 Ruben Amorim needs way more than ‘two or three transfer windows’ to fix Man Utd
👉 Who will be the next Man Utd manager if Ruben Amorim is sacked?
👉 Ashworth wanted Man Utd to appoint PL boss instead of Amorim before his £25m sacking
Arsenal are the new Man Utd
The email from Strevs today was evidence – as if it were needed – that football makes people lose their damned minds. We have to put the caveat in that they are not necessarily indicative of all Arsenal fans, many of whom are evolved enough to understand that there isn’t some massive conspiracy against the club, and that there are many factors as to why they have consistently flattered to deceive.
I imagine the same people who take their time to write in such nonsense are rarely wrong and don’t understand why life gets complicated from time to time.
Decisions go against clubs and for them – look at the push on Konate that led to Everton’s last minute goal and then the push by Diaz that facilitated the opportunity for him to fall over the goalkeeper (who is ultimately to blame here, these decisions always go with the attacker).
It’s the same with Arsenal, like it is for all clubs, and whilst they have had a few high profile and distinctly debatable decisions go against them, they have had plenty of others go the other way, without the hyperbolic and hysterical response. Is there anything more frustrating in footballing terms than people cherry picking examples to develop their narrative?
And it made me think that the constant under-achievement of this version of Arsenal is making them a version of Manchester United. The circumstances are different, obviously. United are a horrible mess with no obvious solution to their myriad problems, whilst Arsenal are perhaps one or two players away from being the real deal. But the unhinged responses from a significant minority in the mailbox, well, they are very similar, and as much as Arsenal have improved, they are perennial also-rans, and if they don’t make that final step, the Arteta era will always be perceived as a failure.
Should the blip that Liverpool are having turn into something worse, and should Arsenal get a good run of results, well, maybe this will change this equation. God knows that Liverpool could get very little out of the next three games, and then maybe it will be the turn of their lunatic fringe to start shouting about conspiracies.
It seems to me though that Arsenal have had a few opportunities to take that final step in recent seasons – Liverpool are about where they were last season, and the difference is that so far, Arsenal aren’t – and to blame referees for this is weak and more than a bit pathetic.
Mat (judging by the people slagging me off in the comments section, I must be doing something right)
Snubbing statistics
Righto, it’s been a few months. Tom G has made me bite though. Whilst I don’t disagree with what he says, it’s more about the spirit of how I view football. Tom thinks that statistics mean nothing, but I don’t want them in how I experience football in the first place.
I don’t dispute the point that data and statistics are useful for specialist teams at a club. Performance-enhancing staff will focus on using it to improve an individual to maximise their abilities or on-pitch awareness, and on the team to improve patterns of play. Marginal gains often prove the difference between for example, winning and drawing.
Recruitment staff will focus on using it to maximise the probability of success of a new signing in a system. This is particularly true of teams on a relatively low budget whose signings ‘need to work’ or for a huge club wanting to bank on a single huge signing.
But FatManScouse once said that as soon as you involve technology and data, it takes all the fun out of it. Everyone is become fixated on that being ‘correct’ and take their engagement with football as that, rather than the unknown.
As a fan, as I increasingly watch football, I am bombarded with percentage stats and xG and I don’t have a choice. You can argue that it has led to enlightenment and a better general understanding of the sport but by the same token, I am being led to believe there’s no hope of Liverpool surrendering a lead once they have it because the statistics say so, or of Manchester United ever scoring again (giggles).
Cold statistics rob us of the essentials of hope and the unexpected. If Arsenal don’t concede after 47 minutes, then why bother watch most of the second half? If Chelsea score first then they don’t lose, then might as well switch off after that happens. And we all know it because all the media outlets are now sounding off about it all the time.
Instead, nowadays, people are just on their phones passively comparing their xGs, safe in the knowledge that Akanji has completed yet another pass successfully, checking on their accumulators, or live streaming to their four followers. Sad really. A data-led narrative isn’t fun or sexy. It’s boring and depresses fans. But it’s in our faces all the time and it robs us of a reason to cheer on our teams.
When I was about ten, I was at the Abbey when Stevenage Borough knocked Cambridge United out of the FA Cup – must have been the late ‘90s. They were possibly the dirtiest team I’d ever seen. The referee I’m sure missed a few things, it was never offside, and there were a few scenes of argy-bargy after some horrendous fouling. I felt it all. Injustice, anger, the roar (particularly when we got one back), and the gutting feeling that we were now out of the cup.
Similarly, a few years later we’d had a shocker of a season, and it came down to the final day. We were getting relegated when, deep into stoppage time, we got a corner and, like a true hero and captain, Paul Wanless rose like a salmon to head powerfully into the net. The scenes were incredible – like nothing I’d ever seen at the time – and we stayed up. I felt elation, joy, euphoria, and ecstasy, and even now it brings a lump in my throat just remembering it. I’ve still got his autograph.
Where would I be if Stevenage had correctly had about three players sent off, and where Wanless was told not to go up for corners as he’d only got a 0.2% xG from deadball situations? Perhaps they would be correct and consistent with data-driven outcomes, but there’d be no heart and no soul.
I would prefer broadcasters to ditch a stats-based narrative on analysis, commentating, and punditry. But then gone are the days where Le Tissier, Ginola, Kinkladze, McManaman or Saint-Maximin would beat half a team on their own and score, or that Shearer, Scholes, Hasselbaink, Beckham, or Rooney would rifle one in from 35-yards because players are told to not do those things as they probably won’t end up successful. Just lay it off instead. Pass it simple. Keep the ball. After all, it has a much better percentage risk outcome.
Whilst it is probably good that leg-breakers have had their day in midfield and defence, it has robbed the game of tackles, barges, dissent, and the occasional fight. Instead, the game has become about conning the referee. Oh, and now you can’t mock opponents with celebrations. So, broadcasters have to rely on dry numbers for insights into the game and to create their own sense of drama based around that. Oh, and it was never offside ref! Actually, it was or it wasn’t. That’s it. Proven. Instead of chalking it up to a bad call, it has given rise to worrying numbers-based conspiracy theories from the keyboard. And it just isn’t as fun.
It’s not quite a zero-sum game, but the temptation is to ultimately see football’s future as a clinical degree of ever reducing outcomes. For example, it’s now a shock when a player hits a bad pass. If they do, it will reduce their numbers and they’ll slip off their percentage bracket for players who can ‘do that thing’ as a result. It fits a very prescribed way of playing football and manager philosophy where risks aren’t taken and players simply perform their function and not much more, albeit to a very high level.
Football at the highest level I fear has already become a game run by numbers and played by robots. Perhaps that what the next generation will find rewarding. Good luck to them and their calculators and algorithms. They might be correct on their numbers which may be pleasing to them, but it will never give them unpredictable joy. So, Dejan Lovren: please shoot. Because one day, one will fly in the top corner for a 93rd minute winner and create memories and feelings to last a lifetime.
Rich (boing boing), Cambridge
Niggles
I don’t know what it is, but Vincent Kompany wearing a cap really gets under my skin. No idea why. It just does. Anyone else out there have them irrational pet peeves?
Luke (Men Without Hats) Dublin
Dear Ironsman…
You state in your mail that F365 only focus on the ‘big four’ and then produce a list containing Spurs and many, many references to ManU. So they DO also write articles about small clubs at the bottom of table, you see?
Happy to help.
Monsieur Monkey, boiling piss in the sand
