Manchester United v Newcastle United - EFL Cup - 8:15pm - 01/11/23 - Official Match Thread

Originally Posted by Ethers

Mount’s played well imo, apart from getting caught in moon boots for their goal

Yep. Constant effort, didn’t let his head drop after a couple of misplaced passes, couple of attempts at goal, got about them (apart from the goal).

Embarrassing how much fitter better trained Newcastle are. That’s £#%&!ing shocking that easily as bad as I’ve seen in a long time. Dalot for that first should have been hooked on the spot. What has happened to this team. There’s nothing absolutely nothing there. What happens next. ? It always falls on the manager

Oh great, now we get to listen to Nancy Cartwright here trip over her words.

Couldn't do much about either of those goals. Unstoppable worldies.

The players have genuinely downed tools. Last season (most part) they'd run through walls. Now they can't run through rain.

Genuinely think ETH will be gone soon.

Why is there an actual moomin doing punditry?

Couple of good changes and a goal then the game can turn quickly. Far from done.

If it doesn't turn round then Fulham away feels like it could be a must win for ETH.

I can’t believe how easy we are to play against all over the pitch. Punchless up front, chaotic in midfield and soft as shit at the back.

We’ve struggled in every game against every opponent this season, bar one game against a second string Palace team who didn’t give a shit.

Originally Posted by NedKelly

Ratcliffe’s bid is supposedly favoured - the Glazers might well not be going anywhere, but by all accounts one of the conditions of his bid is that he’ll be in charge of the football side of things going forward. If that’s true - why would they bother going through the hassle of paying Erik off and searching for a new manager?

You really think the Glazers have engineering a deal that will focus the club's energy and attention on the football side of things? Big Jim is about to become a poster boy for on the pitch failure. No club has an ownership model like this. The Glazers carved it up to coin it some more.

Originally Posted by NedKelly

Ratcliffe’s bid is supposedly favoured - the Glazers might well not be going anywhere, but by all accounts one of the conditions of his bid is that he’ll be in charge of the football side of things going forward. If that’s true - why would they bother going through the hassle of paying Erik off and searching for a new manager?

As much as the ratcliffe will bid for sporting control, likewise the glazers wouldn’t sell and stay on in a position that they have no say .

Strong chance it’s some two ticks %@#$&!s were ratcliffe will become public PR bring in a DOF etc but the glazers still get their “tick” and possibly to veto anything they don’t like.

Rather than having one owner going in the set direction, we will end up with two owners going in opposite directions.

EVEN IF ratcliffe gets full sporting control, the gimps will still have control over the business, what happens when he demands more funds to be released and the gimps say no?

Or he demands something on sporting side but the gimps veto it because they don’t think it’s in best interest of the business. There has to be some overlap between the two and if you have one person controlling one with a vested interested in one side (ratcliffe and sporting decisions) and another side interested in the business (gimps) you will bound to get situations sometimes where they disagree

It’s going to be a shit show

Originally Posted by Dasilvatwins

As much as the ratcliffe will bid for sporting control, likewise the glazers wouldn’t sell and stay on in a position that they have no say .

Strong chance it’s some two ticks %@#$&!s were ratcliffe will become public PR bring in a DOF etc but the glazers still get their “tick” and possibly to veto anything they don’t like.

Rather than having one owner going in the set direction, we will end up with two owners going in opposite directions.

EVEN IF ratcliffe gets full sporting control, the gimps will still have control over the business, what happens when he demands more funds to be released and the gimps say no?

Or he demands something on sporting side but the gimps veto it because they don’t think it’s in best interest of the business. There has to be some overlap between the two and if you have one person controlling one with a vested interested in one side (ratcliffe and sporting decisions) and another side interested in the business (gimps) you will bound to get situations sometimes where they disagree

It’s going to be a shit show

Post.

Originally Posted by Lodestar

You really think the Glazers have engineering a deal that will focus the club's energy and attention on the football side of things? Big Jim is about to become a poster boy for on the pitch failure. No club has an ownership model like this. The Glazers carved it up to coin it some more.

mental isn’t it

minority investor given full reins over the footballing side.

I don’t think that was downing tools . Just a mixture of extreme lack of confidence and lack of ability.

Dalot is trying he’s just genuinely awful.

half time subs again.

never seen a top manager keep having to change things at half time so often.

But yeah he is the man to help get us back to the top.

Let’s just sit back and watch how £#%&!ing bad this is going to get. There’s plenty more thrashings to be handed out to this lot. They’re easier to play through than a blind under 10s team.

The players quite obviously are tossing this off now. They’ve decided that the manager isn’t to their liking and they’d quite like a new one who doesn’t upset them.

Originally Posted by marlo

half time subs again.

never seen a top manager keep having to change things at half time so often.

But yeah he is the man to help get us back to the top.

Would you rather he didn’t change things then?

Hannibal stays on

Originally Posted by Dasilvatwins

As much as the ratcliffe will bid for sporting control, likewise the glazers wouldn’t sell and stay on in a position that they have no say .

Strong chance it’s some two ticks %@#$&!s were ratcliffe will become public PR bring in a DOF etc but the glazers still get their “tick” and possibly to veto anything they don’t like.

Rather than having one owner going in the set direction, we will end up with two owners going in opposite directions.

EVEN IF ratcliffe gets full sporting control, the gimps will still have control over the business, what happens when he demands more funds to be released and the gimps say no?

Or he demands something on sporting side but the gimps veto it because they don’t think it’s in best interest of the business. There has to be some overlap between the two and if you have one person controlling one with a vested interested in one side (ratcliffe and sporting decisions) and another side interested in the business (gimps) you will bound to get situations sometimes where they disagree

It’s going to be a shit show

If it’s a pr stake then it’s unlikely that Radcliffe will want to be associated with an utter shit show.

None of us genuinely know how the arrangement will be carved up or work. Granted it sounds unusual. But it’s different to what we’ve had for the last 18 years and at this moment m, I’ll take any change going.

Originally Posted by marlo

half time subs again.

never seen a top manager keep having to change things at half time so often.

But yeah he is the man to help get us back to the top.

everyone is calling for half time subs you belm

Originally Posted by marlo

half time subs again.

never seen a top manager keep having to change things at half time so often.

But yeah he is the man to help get us back to the top.

We're two nil down you stupid bastard.