Mourinho - "I STAY"

Originally Posted by RemisMoses

We can’t blame United for hiring him it was easy 80 : 90% in favour. We just all expected him to change it seems really nieve now. I am was as guilty as anyone.

You can't blame the club for the manager they chose to hire?

Originally Posted by Clownbones

People HOPED he would change

He was never going to

We got him because he wins.

We panicked

We got him because nobody else will take him any more because of his toxic reputation.

He's a symbol of our desperation. And his.

Originally Posted by andyroo

We got him because nobody else will take him any more because of his toxic reputation.

He's a symbol of our desperation. And his.

We didn't want him in 2013 when he was better.

We got him because we had missed out on CL again terrified of not being relevant

We abandoned what we supposedly wanted after Fergie and went for the guy that wins

No vision no patience no plan

We're paying for it now.

Jose doing what he does: win a bit, bore everyone, annoy everyone then leave under a cloud

Why would we be any different

Originally Posted by Billy Redface

You can't blame the club for the manager they chose to hire?

Yes that’s correct well worked out. As the vast majority of its customers agreed with the appointment.

Originally Posted by RemisMoses

Yes that’s correct well worked out. As the vast majority of its customers agreed with the appointment.

So because the vast majority of customers were ok with it, we shouldn't judge them for whether it was right or not?

Originally Posted by Billy Redface

So because the vast majority of customers were ok with it, we shouldn't judge them for whether it was right or not?

It would be hypocritical of those customers to call the club a set of @#%&!s because they hired him. Which is the post I was responding too. Is it that difficult to understand?

Originally Posted by RemisMoses

Yes that’s correct well worked out. As the vast majority of its customers agreed with the appointment.

Vast majority of its customers wanted Michael knighton David hirst and Fergie gone in 1990

Originally Posted by Clownbones

Vast majority of its customers wanted Michael knighton David hirst and Fergie gone in 1990

f***ing hell ive got involved in one of these boring tit for tat things Zzzzzz wana talk about lvg?

Of course it wasn’t right I think that’s a gimme but blaming the club for hiring him is wrong. It’s a cross we all have to bear.

Originally Posted by RemisMoses

It would be hypocritical of those customers to call the club a set of c***s because they hired him. Which is the post I was responding too. Is it that difficult to understand?

Where have I indicated that I'm struggling with comprehending the post?

I understand it. I just disagree with it.

The notion that the club can't be blamed for hiring someone simply because the choice was popular (which I think is debatable anyway...) is essentially removing any idea that the club is responsible for the best interests of the club.

At the very least, you could blame them for pandering to the fans.

Despite the doubts about David Moyes, the fans were fully behind him once he was through the door (the chosen one banner). Does that vindicate the fact he was woefully inadequate?

If they wanted to hire someone who was popular, they could have given it to Giggs. They hired Mourinho to win. If he doesn't do it, that's on him and the club for hiring him.

Originally Posted by RemisMoses

£#%&!ing hell ive got involved in one of these boring tit for tat things Zzzzzz wana talk about lvg?

Of course it wasn’t right I think that’s a gimme but blaming the club for hiring him is wrong. It’s a cross we all have to bear.

Just replying to one of your posts pal. Forum for discussion isn't it?

Haven't mentioned lvg so dunno what youre on about there

Honestly can’t remember any of his teams being this boring at all. Maybe Inter were but I didn’t see them and presume they had shit players, do remember Porto being amazingly cynical cheaters mind, but not boring.

Originally Posted by Billy Redface

Where have I indicated that I'm struggling with comprehending the post?

I understand it. I just disagree with it.

The notion that the club can't be blamed for hiring someone simply because the choice was popular (which I think is debatable anyway...) is essentially removing any idea that the club is responsible for the best interests of the club.

At the very least, you could blame them for pandering to the fans.

Despite the doubts about David Moyes, the fans were fully behind him once he was through the door (the chosen one banner). Does that vindicate the fact he was woefully inadequate?

If they wanted to hire someone who was popular, they could have given it to Giggs. They hired Mourinho to win. If he doesn't do it, that's on him and the club for hiring him.

lovely bit of revised history. The fans were well against Moyes appointment and lvg and then to say we wanted Giggs after that utter bull shit. They went with the fans on mourinho because the 2 before were a disaster and they had no choice but to placate. Of course the ‘winner’ aspect came into it for the club and the fans, it clouded judgement.

And you indicated you was struggling with comprehension as you repeated it back to me with a question mark unless your f***ing australian.

I’ve no interest in getting involved in one of these everybody is a nobby know it all. Just giving my opinion could be right more likely wrong I couldn’t care less. Have a smashing day William.

Originally Posted by RemisMoses

lovely bit of revised history. The fans were well against Moyes appointment and lvg and then to say we wanted Giggs after that utter bull shit. They went with the fans on mourinho because the 2 before were a disaster and they had no choice but to placate. Of course the ‘winner’ aspect came into it for the club and the fans, it clouded judgement.

And you indicated you was struggling with comprehension as you repeated it back to me with a question mark unless your f***ing australian.

I’ve no interest in getting involved in one of these everybody is a nobby know it all. Just giving my opinion could be right more likely wrong I couldn’t care less. Have a smashing day William.

No revisionism. I'm not saying Moyes was the number one choice or massively popular, but he was backed once he was here. Whether he was backed or he wasn't, has no bearing on whether the club should have hired him, is the point?

The fans were not against Lvg signing. That simply isn't true. He was a less divisive choice than Mourinho. That could well have been because he followed Moyes though. Nevertheless..... the point about Giggs is that he's a popular character with the fans. It doesn't mean they should give him the job.

I hardly think hiring Mourinho was 'going with the fans'. He was probably a largely popular choice, but he's also a very divisive guy and many had their doubts about him.

Questions were Repeated back to you, with an extension to the original statement to provoke further discussion.

You don't seem to like that. Or the very basic concept of someone disagreeing with your opinion. Hence you implying that anyone disagreeing with you is a Nobby Know It All.

You suggested the club can't be blamed for hiring Mourinho because he was popular.

I said that the popularity shouldn't absolve the club of blame.

Very simple. You seem to have taken offence to it.

It's a discussion. If you don't wish to have it, so be it.

Have a good day.

Originally Posted by ZiggyStardust

This antiquated way of thinking needs to be done away with

Why would you put all the power to buy and sell players in the hands of a man who probably won’t be here by the end of the contract of any player he signs

Fans have to come to terms with the modern game as even if a manager is successful here he’ll still probably not be here even medium term never mind long term
Most coaches these days just want to do 3 or 4 years at a club and then move onto another country to enjoy another challenge and experience or maybe move back to their own country

This idea that we have to give all the power to the manager in the hope that we have another Fergie or Busby who will stay for the long term is stupid
We should be making decisions based on the most likely scenario which is clearly not expecting a manager to be here 10 years

The sporting director appoints a first team coach with a similar vision on football and works with him on recruitment but with the sporting director having the final say while the first coach gets on with his job of coaching the team
That’s the only way forward as far as I’m concerned

Spot on. The increasingly short term tenures of managers makes the argument for letting them be the sole decision-maker at the club on first team issues completely outdated. Especially when that manager is a short-term thinker as Mourinho is.

There needs to be a common thread of ideas running through the club. In the modern game stability comes from those above the manager. They need to work with him, but it's clearly important that they take a role in making more longer term decisions.

Originally Posted by Bunker Buster

You’re hard......

Keep throwing bad rep and your toys around you utter slug...

Keep your eyes peeled when your out and about slug.

I’ll be bringing the salt....

Originally Posted by waynes ear's

ok mate.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Spot on. The increasingly short term tenures of managers makes the argument for letting them be the sole decision-maker at the club on first team issues completely outdated. Especially when that manager is a short-term thinker as Mourinho is.

There needs to be a common thread of ideas running through the club. In the modern game stability comes from those above the manager. They need to work with him, but it's clearly important that they take a role in making more longer term decisions.

Sporting directors can be sacked and move on too you know. ‘Long-term planning’ is buying the best players you can at the youngest age possible. That’s all. The rest is just luck.

Originally Posted by waynes ear's

£#%&! united off. you stupid stupid @#%&!s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3CkfPHq4pI

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Spot on. The increasingly short term tenures of managers makes the argument for letting them be the sole decision-maker at the club on first team issues completely outdated. Especially when that manager is a short-term thinker as Mourinho is.

There needs to be a common thread of ideas running through the club. In the modern game stability comes from those above the manager. They need to work with him, but it's clearly important that they take a role in making more longer term decisions.

Good post

Four completely different managers in five years and surprise surprise we're a mess.

Originally Posted by Clownbones

Four completely different managers in five years and surprise surprise we're a mess.

I wonder where United would be if we stuck with David Moyes.

Originally Posted by Knockers

Sporting directors can be sacked and move on too you know. ‘Long-term planning’ is buying the best players you can at the youngest age possible. That’s all. The rest is just luck.

It's it's also not letting them go and regretting it. Or letting their contracts wind down. Or giving long contracts to players who will prove a burden. Or getting into bed with shady agents. Or not letting a manager build an identity on the field, a profile of player and a regime of training when he's potentially only a bad month from losing his authority on the place. And showing commitment to the academy.

I just think it's a little illogical to give ultimate power to someone who, by averages in the current game, won't be around much longer than another year or two, and perhaps most importantly if he does feel under results pressure will usually move away from long term planning and closer to self preservation? The argument against a greater structure weakens as the game itself becomes more unstable.