Why do people still use this argument when we can see teams that also got fucked by injuries and still didn't play as badly as ETH did? I wouldn't be surprised if ETH's injuries ridden squad still cost more than Newcastle's healthy squad
Who had as much trouble in the back line as United? It was absolutely insane the amount of injuries they had. Something like 5 CBs injured at a very long period of time.
We had an actual lb for like 2 games or however long Shaw was fit for. A good chunk of games with Dalot being the only living fullback, and were down to like the 5/6th choice CB for a large period, and just one CB by the end...
What a terrible take. You mentioned 4 players... At one point we had an on loan cdm playing left back because 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice left back were all injured.... GTFO 😂
If you watch the FA cup final, you can see how important Martinez was for the build up not to mention his defensive abilities. Well he wasn’t available for a majority of the season due to injuries.
If a squad is that reliant on a single player after a manager has been there for two years and spent £400m, then I don't think you can really use that as an excuse for said manager.
Don't understand these simple minded arguments. They clearly aren't saying we were shit all season because just Martinez was injured, but that's what you gathered from that.
Varane has only had 3 seasons in his whole career where he didn't miss 10+ games through injury. Him getting injured shouldn't have been a shock for Ten Hag and should've been planned for. Also, Varane was in the squad for 26/38 Premier League games.
It’s about an elite partnership that compliment each other which varane and Martinez deffo do.. do you think arsenal would have had the same season defensively if either of their CBs got injured? Or Man City would dominate withought having litterally 5 top class CBs.. it’s incredibly important
Ten Hag was aware that his two starting centre backs are prone to getting injured and it was widely expected for Varane not to stay beyond this season anyway. He should've signed another quality centre back who could act as depth and replace Varane long term, and probably another left back since Shaw has spent half his career injured.
Arsenal suffered injuries at the back last season and signed Timber as additional cover across the line. Liverpool had a season a few years ago where their defensive injuries were worse than United's, and they finished 3rd with Nat Phillips and Rhys Williams playing there. They signed Konaté after that for additional depth. City make a point of signing players who are flexible, so they always have depth in case their centre backs get injured.
Like 70% of it?
Casemiro played in 65% of games. Antony was fit for the whole season. Onana was fit for the whole season. Hojlund was fit for the vast majority of the season.
Mount, Martinez, and Malacia were the only ones who missed most of the season through injury.
Shaw missed most of the season. Højlund was injured in the beginning and missed around a month or so in the middle. Varane missed close to 50% of the game. Antony missed a few months due to allegations (he can stay out of the team), mainoo was available until Dec. Martial missed 70% of the games. Wan-bissaka missed a solid chunk, meaning lindelof and Amrabat played LB. Reguillon missed around a month during his loan. Evan’s missed around a month or more. Kambwala missed the 1.5-2 months at the end.
Mix that in with the others you named and you have players playing out of position and day in and day out. They had 35+ different back line combinations. I don’t think ETH did well this year but who could have?
The question was how much of the £400m that Ten Hag spent ended up being injured last season. Most of the players you listed were not part of the money he spent.
I know there were other players who spent time injured, but a lot of them are injury-prone players which is all the more reason for Ten Hag to have spent that money more wisely and built some squad depth.
So in 2 summer transfer windows (regardless of amount spent), he is responsible to field a full healthy 11 week in and week out? Just players brought in under his watch?
We have 1 competent midfielder and he missed the first half of the season. Then no lb for like 90% of the season, and barely any cbs.
Anyone thinking that didnt effect the team is wrong.
There is more to it than just injuries, no doubt. But I'd argue that the style of play would've been a lot better if we could get some consistency into the backline, even if it cost less.
We played 31 different back fours in 43 matches. ChatGPT said Newcastle had 10 different backlines.
Because 7/10 defenders were injured for some time. Their best cb duo Varane-Martinez was unavailable almost the full season. Heck the duo started the fa cup final and guess what they won it. Martinez I think only played 11 games. There are many more arguments.
He showed at the end of the season hes cable of changing and coaching different tactics, he was trying to play a way where if it goes wrong it looks dreadful.. I think he’s actually a very good coach who basically had a failed experiment and was stubborn. You can’t put a price on a manager who can win one off finals.. obvs need to do better in the league.. but say if we reach a major final I’d like ETH to be in charge.. some coaches lose a lot of finals..
i guess you referung to Newcastle, Chelsea and Brighton ? did those teams had expected results in league and europe ? they struggled with injuries as well. its not like one them overachieved or something
Even in that first year the vast majority of wins weren't convincing and usually by a one goal margin. Not to mention the away form against teams in the top half of the table. Both seasons it was almost entirely down to individual moments of brilliance.
I thought his first season was pretty impressive. It tailed off, but that's about as well as you can expect.
That they then get a negative goal difference, gets knocked out in the group by Gala and Copenhagen and largely look completely open for probably 58/60 games this season. I'd say they were lucky to finish top half based on their performances.
There are factors. Rashford, Casemiro being garbage. Injuries. But it's been a complete disaster of a season performance wise (which obviously makes the cup win pretty incredible). I'm really surprised they stuck with him. And the managerial market is probably why it took this long.
Because he had the players to produce moments of individual brilliance to bail the team out almost every time. In terms of team cohesion and structure I don't think many could say it was visible and last season that was absolutely the case. Of course things could change this season depending on INEOS and how they shape that team but I'd be surprised after two seasons.
He is the one who puts those players on the field. If you are going to slate managers for the wrong tactics or team selection, you got to give credit when they put the players on and they score.
Saying he had to deal with the Greenwood drama is understating his own role in that disaster. I support him staying this summer, but that Greenwood debacle was largely on him for thinking he could just bring him back into the team.
He didn't say it, but several reports from reputable journalists with sources within the club have confirmed that he was steadfast in wanting to bring Greenwood back despite concerns from some other decision makers within the club.
Are these the same "sources from within the club" who told us ETH was definitely getting sacked no matter what happened in the cup final, or other equally reliable ones?
No, actually, it's the same sources who definitively said that a decision had not yet been made when all of Chelsea's reporters were the ones claiming we'd already decided to sack him the day before the FA Cup Final.
When 3 of your 4 main back liners are out for most of the season, expect some topsy turvy results.
I mean we've seen the likes of Liverpool almost collapse with just one of their main defenders missing (VVD) we had 3 missing in action (Varane, Martinez & Shaw)
Fucking hell. Flair checks out. According to Tranfermarkt's article on this from May, we finished 10th mid-injury-table with 114 games missed. Twice as many as City, nine fewer than Villa. But apparently they can "use this is an excuse". There's also West Ham and Palace who had fewer or similar days missed.
Other teams had it pretty bad, but we were completely middle of the road.
Which is why you will rarely see an Arsenal fan complain about injuries last season (unlike the season before). Jorginho and Havertz did well in the absence of our two key players, but Timber at LB was sorely missed, especially in the Champions League. I don’t think any other team except for Man Utd., Newcastle, and Brighton had significant and prolonged injuries to warrant an excuse.
>Timber out for the season
Yes
>Jesus out for half season
Played 27 games so hardly missed half the season, 1 more than last season and still scored x3 less goals and ended up being benched by Havertz
>Partey out for more than half
He was but when you buy a £100m defensive mid during the summer that's not a huge loss
>Martinelli was out injured as well for good chunk of games.
He played 35 games, not much more needs to be said about that
The part where Arsenal can't complain is that they were really lucky with playing teams missing players main examples being: City without Rodri, Liverpool without Trent, Salah and Szoboszlai, United without everyone, Chelsea without Palmer
Tbf if they're not going to get rid of him then they kind of need to extend, otherwise there's just going to be endless discussion about it during the season and it'll make negotiating new signings and contract extensions more difficult because there's no long term clarity
Yeah, this is my thoughts as well - if United aren't in the top 4 by the end of October, then EtH is gone anyway - you literally achieve nothing apart from additional costs.
Either way, I think you'd have to extend whether you genuinely believe ten Hag is the right guy or if you don't but haven't found a better alternative in the market. It creates further uncertainty for squad building (or trimming) if you don't know who the manager is going to be for a few years out.
INEOS should start recruiting for the general style of play they'd want United to adopt manager-agnostic. I'm pretty sure ten Hag is on a fairly short leash to prove that he can get results playing the way that he tried this past season. If they're off to a similarly poor start by October, I expect the club might be more ready to move on.
Bayern probably get a special shoutout here too. But a five year contract (with an optional year) at a club that hasn’t had a manager last five years in the last 50 will top most choices
The board absolutely did not show faith. They interviewed multiple other candidates while he was under contract who either weren't interested or weren't considered good enough.
>They are literally giving him a new contract
They have to give him a new deal if he stays and it's a one year extension.
>They decided to interview and talk with other managers after we have had our worst ever premier league season. I don't see anything wrong with testing the waters right now
Have you ever seen a team openly interview other managers while they still have one under contract?
they don’t have to give him one if he stays. he’s currently under contract for one year further plus they already have the option to extend 1 year further built into the deal.
they already had the option to extend the deal one year further, so they could have just done that to avoid the issue you described if that’s all it was about.
>understand this as his contract was extended to finish 2 years from now,
No, he had 1 year left. The +1 wouldve left him with 2 years left. Now he has a 3 year deal.
You have the option of an extra year on his current contract. Surely the sensible decision is to see how the season goes and activate that extra year, especially given the board have been openly interviewing other managers for the job?
Nobody is trying to poach Ten Hag from United at the minute, so this just seems like the Ole deal all over again.
Carrington needs upgrading/new training facilities built... new, competent medical department hired and other BTS issues are needed to be sorted before changing manager.
Keep ETH while those are being done and then if he fails, sack him.
Been the only logical way forward for INEOS since they took over the running of the club.
I concur with this. I think the analogies drawn in other comments fall short because the structural dysfunction at United is uniquely severe.
If we really are as limited by PSR as reports suggest, even with sales, paying a termination fee would take funds away from immediate needs. It also wouldn’t be a fair situation for a new manager (lack of credible alternatives to ten Hag notwithstanding) if he were to start with such limited funds, a squad turning over, and bosses still unpacking boxes or pulling weeds.
There’s a good coach in there somewhere. Give him more support, more checks and balances, and a season without a comically long injury list. Is it a perfect situation? No. Can Man United create a perfect situation? Also no, not at this point.
i can't get my head around why we would do this. whilst i don't mind him staying as other options arent great, there are blatant question marks about last season and ineos clearly aren't too convinced.
surely he has to earn the extension by doing well this season? and if we're desperate to show we back him why not just activate that +1 he reportedly has in a few months?
There is a suggestion that ten Hag has a transfer veto in his current contract. Perhaps one of the reasons the club will extend his contract is to remove that clause, thus bringing Erik further in line with their way of working under their new structure.
Also, his stock has never really been lower, he isn't in much of a position to start making demands. It could be a good opportunity to renew him on favourable terms.
>There is a suggestion that ten Hag has a transfer veto in his current contract.
It's exactly this, they will transition him into a head coach role and leave transfers solely to the recruitment staff.
Isn't it kind of bad though when the manager (or "head coach" if you will) doesn't get a say (by the sounds of it) in transfer dealings? Could end up with a Chelsea-like situation where a bunch of random young players are brought in as investments, but the manager doesn't really have a plan or use for them.
Not entirely. I do think the head coach should have an input but overall the structure should be above the head coach setting the style of play and recruitment strategy, with all departments working in tandem. We’ve seen it for years, managers bringing in their own targets, a year or two later they get sacked, the new manager needs 5/6 of “their” players, cycle repeats.
Not really tbh, a manager should say I need a player in this position who can do xyz similar to this player. The scouting department should then go out and find a variety of options at different price levels and then go back to the director of football who makes the decision alongside the manager.
United for the past 10 years have been manager wants this player so we buy that player no matter what.
Also ETH has requested Antony and Mount so far as key signings and have both been wastes of money.
Why would you extend the contract of someone who’s stock has never been lower (because on expected points he had Manchester United 14th in the prem and only got results based on player ability, his tactics were dreadful).
There are loads of reasons why it makes sense, IMO.
1) Publicly backing the manager by extending his contract. Putting your faith in him to turn it around after a great FA Cup win.
2) Understanding that he was working under mitigating circumstances last season (injuries, club takeover, etc.). The season prior United finished on 75 points, comfortably in the top 4.
3) If he goes on to have a good start to the season and the club then wants to extend, the manager will be in a better position to negotiate a higher wage or make other demands that the club may be able to circumvent this summer.
4) Following the review, it looks like the club wasn't fully convinced by any potential candidates available to us.
5) Simply avoid making any rash changes until the structure above is set and firing on all cylinders. We are still waiting on Dan Ashworth's arrival, for example.
This should be looked at less as an extension and more of a contract renegotiation. They’ll probably fiddle around with some of the clauses to account for their new administrative structure and make it easier to sack him when he inevitably underperforms.
> make it easier to sack him when he inevitably underperforms
Why would he agree to that then? Be idiotic of him to give up money for basically a fake contract extension when it's publicly known keeping Ten Hag was basically the last resort because every other option wasn't any good.
Unless he does something spectacular next season, INEOS would probably not hesitate a second to sack him if someone they want becomes available
Well it’s a negotiation, Ten Hag doesn’t have to agree to that, but he doesn’t have a ton of leverage either considering INEOS are fairly happy to sack him.
Probably restructuring the contract that was given to him pre-INEOS clauses
Considering ETH has veto authority on signings, new owners are probably looking at that and saying 'yeah, no' lol among other terms.
Because he feels greatly undermined since the club were looking for new managers behind his back, so they must show they have trust in him by extending his contract
Others have meant some re-negotiation of the terms of his contract, maybe in relation to the veto aspect of current contract and this might be true.
I think though this is more in relation to ensure he doesn't appear as a lame duck manager in his last year of his contact which might hinder making purchases (of players) and having the current players down tools if things don't start well, believing his contract expiring at the end of the season would mean he wouldn't be there next year.
Really weird decision. I said in another post, but this is giving me Brendan Rodgers after 14/15 at Liverpool vibes. Everyone thought he should be sacked, but then he was given more time only for him to be sacked after a poor start to the season, but not before having a say in our summer transfer business. I can see the same thing happening here and if the report from the Athletic earlier is true and Tuchel did interview well and was liked before he chose to step away from the process, it wouldn't surprise me if Ineos went back after him.
It'll be interesting to see if his transfer veto clause will be removed from his contract as I imagine Ineos would want their staff to have the total say in transfers.
Brendan's team in 14/15 was not as good as this United one and his 13/14 team was better than anything Ten Hag has produced, unless you're defining everything by strictly an FA cup and league cup.
He finished on 84 points and almost won the league, yeah he has no trophies to his name but he’s definitely reached higher heights than Ten Hag in terms of performance.
Makes sense since he only has 1 year left on his contract. Going into a season with a manager who knows he'll be gone at the end is guaranteed to fail since the players and staff won't fully buy in, and transfer targets won't want to join in such an unstable situation.
Now we're getting different.
Honestly, expected that they would just keep him on current contract and not dump him, but the EXTENSION however makes things interesting.
Just a bizarre saga over the last month. I fully expect the circus will resume no more than six weeks into next season as well. The United board are not going to stop looking for a successor just because they've given him an extension.
Hey we are going to replace you…… I mean… here’s two more years…. This club I tell ya! This should not have got to this point, they should not have taken weeks in public discussing this. He deserves at least another year, with some backing to fix this lazy squad. Cause firing a manager every other year seems to fix it all right?!
If he has little say in transfers and if he’s more lucky with injuries (insofar that it’s down to luck) I still think he could do well. He’s always been bad with transfers, but not with setting up his team
>He’s always been bad with transfers, but not with setting up his team
Not bad with setting up his team? United ended the season with a -1 goal difference and conceded more shots than Luton.
He hasn’t always been bad with setting up his team, while he always has been bad with transfers. He has been bad with setting up his team at United sure, but not with previous teams
He was terrible with setting up his team. He saw how easily Wolves got through his midfield on the opening day (with a strong squad available, by the way) and then proceeded to set up the same way again and again and again, only finally giving up on it for the last few games.
> He’s always been bad with transfers
I dont know where this narrative comes from tbh, only Antony has been truly dreadful. Rasmus, Martinez have been excellent, Onana (even with the mistakes), Casemiro and Eriksen have been decent, and Malacia and Mount have barely played because of injuries, hardly the managers fault
Because he has always been bad with transfers. At Ajax he was bad with transfers too, he really wanted multiple players for too much money because he knew them and had worked with them, only to hardly ever play them.
Only Antony is enough reason for it to be confirmed to be honest. He had worked with him for years, and anyone watching Ajax regularly knew he wasn’t that good. So Ten Hag should have known better than to let them spend so much money on him. Hence, bad at transfers.
ten Hag doesnt control how much mone is spent on players. He suggested players, that United doesnt have a competent scouting department is a different issue
Think about it for a second dude. There is a limited budget and so you can’t spend unlimited money. Buying Antony severely impacts the potential of other players coming. Do you seriously think there is no discussion about that? Come on man, the transfer fee is partly on him
That argument has always driven me crazy. Same with the slagging off of the scouting department. The same scouts that originally valued Antony at like 25m. Yet somehow ETH avoids the heat for what will go down as United's all time worst transfer. Its weird. For so many fans the man is infallible for some reason.
Rasmus has not been excellent. He cost £70m and United still are looking to sign a forward.
Onana has been competent in the league while almost singlehandedly knocking united out of the CL.
Casemiro has been a dreadful signing.
Rasmus has been a good signing. Price tag aside, he’s had a decent amount of goals with a pretty shocking support system. Onana has also been very good in the league - to say ‘competent’ is underplaying it quite a bit. And Case was pretty fucking good his first season, notably scoring some big goals for us.
>Rasmus has been a good signing.
Rasmus had a good spell of ten games and a terrible return either side of it. The shocking support system is an interesting take since he's playing in front of Fernandes who many consider to be a world class creator. His link up play and positioning is atrocious.
Onana has not been very good. He has been decent in the league and appalling in Europe while also being one of the most expensive keepers in football history.
>And Case was pretty fucking good his first season, notably scoring some big goals for us.
Casemiro will cost United around £160m over the life of his contract. He had one good season and then fell off a cliff. If the Saudis don't bail United out he'll be one of the worst purchases united have ever made.
City signed Haaland and still signed Alvarez. Klopp signed 2 players for one position as well. Do you expect United to only have 1 striker in the whole squad?
> Casemiro has been a dreadful signing.
Sure, if your memory goes to only 8 months at a time
> Onana has been competent in the league while almost singlehandedly knocking united out of the CL.
Onana has made key saves which dont make the highlights reel compared to his mistakes.
>City signed Haaland and still signed Alvarez. Klopp signed 2 players for one position as well. Do you expect United to only have 1 striker in the whole squad?
Alvarez has played almost all his minutes at 10.
>Sure, if your memory goes to only 8 months at a time
He has physically fallen off a cliff after one year. There's absolutely no way of arguing it was anything other than a terrible signing.
>Onana has made key saves which dont make the highlights reel compared to his mistakes.
So does every keeper. You just spend more time watching your own team. Arsenal fans were trotting out the same excuse last season.
I think this is the correct decision. We saw last season how good he was when having players available. Lisandro missing most of the season, Varane getting injured randomly all the time, missing both natural LBs (having to play a RB on the left) and Casemiro forgetting how to be a professional footballer are not his fault. If he can start the same two CBs 3 matches in a row, things will be different.
I honestly think he can definitely be the right guy to head a long term project.
this is hilarious...
.. I'd love to put money down against him being at the helm in another 12 months
ManUre are in a heap of poop, and they're just digging themselves deeper and deeper into it
- it's such a shame
;o)
The things an FA cup can do for a man
Don't let LVG read this
Or Carlo Ancelotti
That's Chelsea though nothing they do should be considered the norm
Chelsea's greatest managerial sacking blunder imo
The man finished third in his first year. He didn’t just decide to be shite come the second. Injuries absolutely wrecked the squad selection.
Why do people still use this argument when we can see teams that also got fucked by injuries and still didn't play as badly as ETH did? I wouldn't be surprised if ETH's injuries ridden squad still cost more than Newcastle's healthy squad
Who had as much trouble in the back line as United? It was absolutely insane the amount of injuries they had. Something like 5 CBs injured at a very long period of time.
We had an actual lb for like 2 games or however long Shaw was fit for. A good chunk of games with Dalot being the only living fullback, and were down to like the 5/6th choice CB for a large period, and just one CB by the end...
The end of the season we had a washed Casemiro playing CB, I don’t think anyone realizes how bad the injury situation actually was
Yeah, it’s not all about the amount of injuries, it’s also about who was injured and their replacements, the back line was a nightmare all season
They were down to, by my count, the 8th choice CB in Willy Kambwala if you count Shaw and Casemiro as starting before him.
Fofana and james out for the season, chalobah out for 5 months, badiashile out for 4 months also? Every team had injuries no excuses...
What a terrible take. You mentioned 4 players... At one point we had an on loan cdm playing left back because 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice left back were all injured.... GTFO 😂
That's not bad compared to United.
That’s nothing.
If you watch the FA cup final, you can see how important Martinez was for the build up not to mention his defensive abilities. Well he wasn’t available for a majority of the season due to injuries.
If a squad is that reliant on a single player after a manager has been there for two years and spent £400m, then I don't think you can really use that as an excuse for said manager.
Don't understand these simple minded arguments. They clearly aren't saying we were shit all season because just Martinez was injured, but that's what you gathered from that.
Both starting CBs missed most of the season, if verane and Martinez play 38 games it’s a completely different season
Varane has only had 3 seasons in his whole career where he didn't miss 10+ games through injury. Him getting injured shouldn't have been a shock for Ten Hag and should've been planned for. Also, Varane was in the squad for 26/38 Premier League games.
It’s about an elite partnership that compliment each other which varane and Martinez deffo do.. do you think arsenal would have had the same season defensively if either of their CBs got injured? Or Man City would dominate withought having litterally 5 top class CBs.. it’s incredibly important
Ten Hag was aware that his two starting centre backs are prone to getting injured and it was widely expected for Varane not to stay beyond this season anyway. He should've signed another quality centre back who could act as depth and replace Varane long term, and probably another left back since Shaw has spent half his career injured. Arsenal suffered injuries at the back last season and signed Timber as additional cover across the line. Liverpool had a season a few years ago where their defensive injuries were worse than United's, and they finished 3rd with Nat Phillips and Rhys Williams playing there. They signed Konaté after that for additional depth. City make a point of signing players who are flexible, so they always have depth in case their centre backs get injured.
How much of that 400M was fit?
Like 70% of it? Casemiro played in 65% of games. Antony was fit for the whole season. Onana was fit for the whole season. Hojlund was fit for the vast majority of the season. Mount, Martinez, and Malacia were the only ones who missed most of the season through injury.
Sure Casemiro played 65% of games but how many of those did he play out of position to cover for other injuries in the team?
He played 7 games out of position at the end of the season, but the vast majority were in his natural position.
Shaw missed most of the season. Højlund was injured in the beginning and missed around a month or so in the middle. Varane missed close to 50% of the game. Antony missed a few months due to allegations (he can stay out of the team), mainoo was available until Dec. Martial missed 70% of the games. Wan-bissaka missed a solid chunk, meaning lindelof and Amrabat played LB. Reguillon missed around a month during his loan. Evan’s missed around a month or more. Kambwala missed the 1.5-2 months at the end. Mix that in with the others you named and you have players playing out of position and day in and day out. They had 35+ different back line combinations. I don’t think ETH did well this year but who could have?
The question was how much of the £400m that Ten Hag spent ended up being injured last season. Most of the players you listed were not part of the money he spent. I know there were other players who spent time injured, but a lot of them are injury-prone players which is all the more reason for Ten Hag to have spent that money more wisely and built some squad depth.
So in 2 summer transfer windows (regardless of amount spent), he is responsible to field a full healthy 11 week in and week out? Just players brought in under his watch?
jonny evans was our most reliable CB. not sure ten hag was able to name the same back line more than 2 games in a row
Yeah, i think at least once. Funny/sadly/ whatever you call it, it was casemiro/evans
Swear FA cup final was the first time I saw martinez n varane start together this season lmfao
We have 1 competent midfielder and he missed the first half of the season. Then no lb for like 90% of the season, and barely any cbs. Anyone thinking that didnt effect the team is wrong.
Bruno played entire season.
Actually even he missed games with an injury, for the first time in his career…
This holds for teams that have squad depth in key areas, we were playing Antony and Amrabat at LB for crying out loud
There is more to it than just injuries, no doubt. But I'd argue that the style of play would've been a lot better if we could get some consistency into the backline, even if it cost less. We played 31 different back fours in 43 matches. ChatGPT said Newcastle had 10 different backlines.
Imagine using Antony and Bruno as your defenders and then tell me.
Why does this shit get upvoted? Show me a single fucking game where Antony and Bruno were starting defenders.
That happened for like 10 minutes in one game
Most of those injuries were in midfield or strike, and not for long periods of time. Most of our defense was made up of backup of backup choices.
Because it is a fair argument. Whatever basic plan Ten Hag had, was destined to fail because he could not use the tools he had in mind to execute it.
It’s not just the number of injuries. It’s the concentration of injuries in 2-3 key positions.
Because 7/10 defenders were injured for some time. Their best cb duo Varane-Martinez was unavailable almost the full season. Heck the duo started the fa cup final and guess what they won it. Martinez I think only played 11 games. There are many more arguments.
He showed at the end of the season hes cable of changing and coaching different tactics, he was trying to play a way where if it goes wrong it looks dreadful.. I think he’s actually a very good coach who basically had a failed experiment and was stubborn. You can’t put a price on a manager who can win one off finals.. obvs need to do better in the league.. but say if we reach a major final I’d like ETH to be in charge.. some coaches lose a lot of finals..
i guess you referung to Newcastle, Chelsea and Brighton ? did those teams had expected results in league and europe ? they struggled with injuries as well. its not like one them overachieved or something
Anyone doubting this go start an FM save as United. It’s fucking brutal.
Which is funny because if you don't play as Man UFC they become the most dominant team on the planet
Even in that first year the vast majority of wins weren't convincing and usually by a one goal margin. Not to mention the away form against teams in the top half of the table. Both seasons it was almost entirely down to individual moments of brilliance.
Yet he took United to CL and won a trophy, and don’t forget he had to deal with Ronaldo and Greenwood drama.
I thought his first season was pretty impressive. It tailed off, but that's about as well as you can expect. That they then get a negative goal difference, gets knocked out in the group by Gala and Copenhagen and largely look completely open for probably 58/60 games this season. I'd say they were lucky to finish top half based on their performances. There are factors. Rashford, Casemiro being garbage. Injuries. But it's been a complete disaster of a season performance wise (which obviously makes the cup win pretty incredible). I'm really surprised they stuck with him. And the managerial market is probably why it took this long.
He was the one who wanted to bring Greenwood back into the team.
Because he had the players to produce moments of individual brilliance to bail the team out almost every time. In terms of team cohesion and structure I don't think many could say it was visible and last season that was absolutely the case. Of course things could change this season depending on INEOS and how they shape that team but I'd be surprised after two seasons.
He is the one who puts those players on the field. If you are going to slate managers for the wrong tactics or team selection, you got to give credit when they put the players on and they score.
Saying he had to deal with the Greenwood drama is understating his own role in that disaster. I support him staying this summer, but that Greenwood debacle was largely on him for thinking he could just bring him back into the team.
I'm so confused. When did ETH say he wanted Greenwood back?
He didn't say it, but several reports from reputable journalists with sources within the club have confirmed that he was steadfast in wanting to bring Greenwood back despite concerns from some other decision makers within the club.
Are these the same "sources from within the club" who told us ETH was definitely getting sacked no matter what happened in the cup final, or other equally reliable ones?
It was Adam Crafton and The Athletic, who are extremely reputable. Denying reality because it doesn't suit you isn't really a good look.
No, actually, it's the same sources who definitively said that a decision had not yet been made when all of Chelsea's reporters were the ones claiming we'd already decided to sack him the day before the FA Cup Final.
Agreed with this, we had so many injuries in key areas and lack of squad depth in those positions made ETH play Evans, Sofywn at LB and Rashy at ST
When 3 of your 4 main back liners are out for most of the season, expect some topsy turvy results. I mean we've seen the likes of Liverpool almost collapse with just one of their main defenders missing (VVD) we had 3 missing in action (Varane, Martinez & Shaw)
This season was unprecedented for injuries. I think every team in the top half apart from Arsenal can use this as an excuse.
Fucking hell. Flair checks out. According to Tranfermarkt's article on this from May, we finished 10th mid-injury-table with 114 games missed. Twice as many as City, nine fewer than Villa. But apparently they can "use this is an excuse". There's also West Ham and Palace who had fewer or similar days missed. Other teams had it pretty bad, but we were completely middle of the road.
Timber out for the season, Jesus out for half season, Partey out for more than half, Martinelli was out injured as well for good chunk of games.
Having basically your whole spine play 95% of the season definitely separated you from all the other sides up there though. That's undeniable.
Which is why you will rarely see an Arsenal fan complain about injuries last season (unlike the season before). Jorginho and Havertz did well in the absence of our two key players, but Timber at LB was sorely missed, especially in the Champions League. I don’t think any other team except for Man Utd., Newcastle, and Brighton had significant and prolonged injuries to warrant an excuse.
>Timber out for the season Yes >Jesus out for half season Played 27 games so hardly missed half the season, 1 more than last season and still scored x3 less goals and ended up being benched by Havertz >Partey out for more than half He was but when you buy a £100m defensive mid during the summer that's not a huge loss >Martinelli was out injured as well for good chunk of games. He played 35 games, not much more needs to be said about that The part where Arsenal can't complain is that they were really lucky with playing teams missing players main examples being: City without Rodri, Liverpool without Trent, Salah and Szoboszlai, United without everyone, Chelsea without Palmer
That Jesus is so shit he makes me atheist
[He has his moments.](https://youtube.com/shorts/JC6GvHs9W2s?si=P4_ilaQsWuX__vcg)
Gooners can attest to this
what winning a fa cup does to a mf
Mourinho and Ole’s contracts got extended in the year they got sacked so not a great omen.
I didn't know Mourinho extended it. Was it after he finished second? Did he only sign a 2 year contract at first?
He signed it in January 2018 when we were on our way to finishing second. Barely played well after that.
Tbf if they're not going to get rid of him then they kind of need to extend, otherwise there's just going to be endless discussion about it during the season and it'll make negotiating new signings and contract extensions more difficult because there's no long term clarity
I mean depending on the performances there still may be endless conversations about it
Yeah, this is my thoughts as well - if United aren't in the top 4 by the end of October, then EtH is gone anyway - you literally achieve nothing apart from additional costs.
Either way, I think you'd have to extend whether you genuinely believe ten Hag is the right guy or if you don't but haven't found a better alternative in the market. It creates further uncertainty for squad building (or trimming) if you don't know who the manager is going to be for a few years out. INEOS should start recruiting for the general style of play they'd want United to adopt manager-agnostic. I'm pretty sure ten Hag is on a fairly short leash to prove that he can get results playing the way that he tried this past season. If they're off to a similarly poor start by October, I expect the club might be more ready to move on.
At least there is hope
Somehow not the most shocking managerial contract this season thanks to Chelsea.
Bayern probably get a special shoutout here too. But a five year contract (with an optional year) at a club that hasn’t had a manager last five years in the last 50 will top most choices
[удалено]
I agree. Gotta give him a go with a fully fit squad.
And someone who can help him out scouting players for his team and not just signing players he's familiar with.
After we get De Ligt though!
Of course, might take a while to get the scout guy out of his garden
[удалено]
The board absolutely did not show faith. They interviewed multiple other candidates while he was under contract who either weren't interested or weren't considered good enough.
[удалено]
>They are literally giving him a new contract They have to give him a new deal if he stays and it's a one year extension. >They decided to interview and talk with other managers after we have had our worst ever premier league season. I don't see anything wrong with testing the waters right now Have you ever seen a team openly interview other managers while they still have one under contract?
they don’t have to give him one if he stays. he’s currently under contract for one year further plus they already have the option to extend 1 year further built into the deal.
They have the option, not him. No team keeps a manager on a one year deal because they have no authority over the players.
they already had the option to extend the deal one year further, so they could have just done that to avoid the issue you described if that’s all it was about.
It is reported that the ability to veto any transfer is written into his current contract which they want removed.
> which they *want* removed so this is something they “want” to do, not something they “have” to do, as you initially claimed. glad we agree
[удалено]
I'm also super delighted, as a non-Man Utd fan.
So much faith they interviewed everyone they could find with a UEFA B.
Yeah this is expected now that he's staying. Couldn't have your manager on the last year on his contract to start a season. Would cause instability.
We had a +1 to pick up on his deal This is just bellendry of the highest caliber
The hopeful side of me hopes it’s also to alter some terms of the contract with how the club is structured.
This is what I think as well
[удалено]
>understand this as his contract was extended to finish 2 years from now, No, he had 1 year left. The +1 wouldve left him with 2 years left. Now he has a 3 year deal.
They want to remove the transfer veto from his contract, so they are rewarding him with another year, otherwise why would he agree?
You have the option of an extra year on his current contract. Surely the sensible decision is to see how the season goes and activate that extra year, especially given the board have been openly interviewing other managers for the job? Nobody is trying to poach Ten Hag from United at the minute, so this just seems like the Ole deal all over again.
i mean... you could. i don't think anyone is gonna come in to try and steal him away.
Two more years Two more years
!RemindMe 6 months
Ten more years of Ten Hag
09:50
Keep pushing city
RemindMe! 6 months
Carrington needs upgrading/new training facilities built... new, competent medical department hired and other BTS issues are needed to be sorted before changing manager. Keep ETH while those are being done and then if he fails, sack him. Been the only logical way forward for INEOS since they took over the running of the club.
I concur with this. I think the analogies drawn in other comments fall short because the structural dysfunction at United is uniquely severe. If we really are as limited by PSR as reports suggest, even with sales, paying a termination fee would take funds away from immediate needs. It also wouldn’t be a fair situation for a new manager (lack of credible alternatives to ten Hag notwithstanding) if he were to start with such limited funds, a squad turning over, and bosses still unpacking boxes or pulling weeds. There’s a good coach in there somewhere. Give him more support, more checks and balances, and a season without a comically long injury list. Is it a perfect situation? No. Can Man United create a perfect situation? Also no, not at this point.
i can't get my head around why we would do this. whilst i don't mind him staying as other options arent great, there are blatant question marks about last season and ineos clearly aren't too convinced. surely he has to earn the extension by doing well this season? and if we're desperate to show we back him why not just activate that +1 he reportedly has in a few months?
There is a suggestion that ten Hag has a transfer veto in his current contract. Perhaps one of the reasons the club will extend his contract is to remove that clause, thus bringing Erik further in line with their way of working under their new structure. Also, his stock has never really been lower, he isn't in much of a position to start making demands. It could be a good opportunity to renew him on favourable terms.
>There is a suggestion that ten Hag has a transfer veto in his current contract. It's exactly this, they will transition him into a head coach role and leave transfers solely to the recruitment staff.
I don’t mind it, to be honest. Gotta have everyone on board and pulling in the same direction!
Isn't it kind of bad though when the manager (or "head coach" if you will) doesn't get a say (by the sounds of it) in transfer dealings? Could end up with a Chelsea-like situation where a bunch of random young players are brought in as investments, but the manager doesn't really have a plan or use for them.
Not entirely. I do think the head coach should have an input but overall the structure should be above the head coach setting the style of play and recruitment strategy, with all departments working in tandem. We’ve seen it for years, managers bringing in their own targets, a year or two later they get sacked, the new manager needs 5/6 of “their” players, cycle repeats.
Not really tbh, a manager should say I need a player in this position who can do xyz similar to this player. The scouting department should then go out and find a variety of options at different price levels and then go back to the director of football who makes the decision alongside the manager. United for the past 10 years have been manager wants this player so we buy that player no matter what. Also ETH has requested Antony and Mount so far as key signings and have both been wastes of money.
Why would you extend the contract of someone who’s stock has never been lower (because on expected points he had Manchester United 14th in the prem and only got results based on player ability, his tactics were dreadful).
There are loads of reasons why it makes sense, IMO. 1) Publicly backing the manager by extending his contract. Putting your faith in him to turn it around after a great FA Cup win. 2) Understanding that he was working under mitigating circumstances last season (injuries, club takeover, etc.). The season prior United finished on 75 points, comfortably in the top 4. 3) If he goes on to have a good start to the season and the club then wants to extend, the manager will be in a better position to negotiate a higher wage or make other demands that the club may be able to circumvent this summer. 4) Following the review, it looks like the club wasn't fully convinced by any potential candidates available to us. 5) Simply avoid making any rash changes until the structure above is set and firing on all cylinders. We are still waiting on Dan Ashworth's arrival, for example.
This should be looked at less as an extension and more of a contract renegotiation. They’ll probably fiddle around with some of the clauses to account for their new administrative structure and make it easier to sack him when he inevitably underperforms.
> make it easier to sack him when he inevitably underperforms Why would he agree to that then? Be idiotic of him to give up money for basically a fake contract extension when it's publicly known keeping Ten Hag was basically the last resort because every other option wasn't any good. Unless he does something spectacular next season, INEOS would probably not hesitate a second to sack him if someone they want becomes available
Well it’s a negotiation, Ten Hag doesn’t have to agree to that, but he doesn’t have a ton of leverage either considering INEOS are fairly happy to sack him.
Probably restructuring the contract that was given to him pre-INEOS clauses Considering ETH has veto authority on signings, new owners are probably looking at that and saying 'yeah, no' lol among other terms.
Because he feels greatly undermined since the club were looking for new managers behind his back, so they must show they have trust in him by extending his contract
Others have meant some re-negotiation of the terms of his contract, maybe in relation to the veto aspect of current contract and this might be true. I think though this is more in relation to ensure he doesn't appear as a lame duck manager in his last year of his contact which might hinder making purchases (of players) and having the current players down tools if things don't start well, believing his contract expiring at the end of the season would mean he wouldn't be there next year.
[удалено]
yes but the performances in the league last season were largely shocking
Really weird decision. I said in another post, but this is giving me Brendan Rodgers after 14/15 at Liverpool vibes. Everyone thought he should be sacked, but then he was given more time only for him to be sacked after a poor start to the season, but not before having a say in our summer transfer business. I can see the same thing happening here and if the report from the Athletic earlier is true and Tuchel did interview well and was liked before he chose to step away from the process, it wouldn't surprise me if Ineos went back after him. It'll be interesting to see if his transfer veto clause will be removed from his contract as I imagine Ineos would want their staff to have the total say in transfers.
Southgate could also be available to step in at any time after the summer.
Brendan never reached the heights that EtH has with a better squad. Time will tell. I still have hope he can stabilize the ship with support.
Rodgers finished two points off first. What are you talking about?
Put Suarez in this current united squad, and united would have been as good. Skrtel and co used to leak goals like crazy
Brendan's team in 14/15 was not as good as this United one and his 13/14 team was better than anything Ten Hag has produced, unless you're defining everything by strictly an FA cup and league cup.
He finished on 84 points and almost won the league, yeah he has no trophies to his name but he’s definitely reached higher heights than Ten Hag in terms of performance.
Two trophies vs none you're saying?
Yes, thats what I literally just said
Alright. I prefer winning trophies.
Makes sense since he only has 1 year left on his contract. Going into a season with a manager who knows he'll be gone at the end is guaranteed to fail since the players and staff won't fully buy in, and transfer targets won't want to join in such an unstable situation.
So will this mean three years in total from now (1 remaining + 2 more) or two seasons from now till 2026?
Now we're getting different. Honestly, expected that they would just keep him on current contract and not dump him, but the EXTENSION however makes things interesting.
Why? Do they want to pay him more when they sack him next season?
Genuinely shocked at this
Just a bizarre saga over the last month. I fully expect the circus will resume no more than six weeks into next season as well. The United board are not going to stop looking for a successor just because they've given him an extension.
LVG died for this
Make it 5.
Wonderful news
This is Cinema
Fucking tragic!
Hey we are going to replace you…… I mean… here’s two more years…. This club I tell ya! This should not have got to this point, they should not have taken weeks in public discussing this. He deserves at least another year, with some backing to fix this lazy squad. Cause firing a manager every other year seems to fix it all right?!
How nice of them to give him a year and a half holiday
new regime same as the old regime
After the worst PL season in our history we reward the manager Yep, brittish glazers are in charge now.
Exactly. Failure rewarded at Manchester United.
If he has little say in transfers and if he’s more lucky with injuries (insofar that it’s down to luck) I still think he could do well. He’s always been bad with transfers, but not with setting up his team
>He’s always been bad with transfers, but not with setting up his team Not bad with setting up his team? United ended the season with a -1 goal difference and conceded more shots than Luton.
He hasn’t always been bad with setting up his team, while he always has been bad with transfers. He has been bad with setting up his team at United sure, but not with previous teams
He was terrible with setting up his team. He saw how easily Wolves got through his midfield on the opening day (with a strong squad available, by the way) and then proceeded to set up the same way again and again and again, only finally giving up on it for the last few games.
I don’t understand why my comment is so hard to understand. I feel like it’s clear what I’m saying but you’re the second person to misread.
I get what you're saying, but you should add "always" after "not" to make it clear
> He’s always been bad with transfers I dont know where this narrative comes from tbh, only Antony has been truly dreadful. Rasmus, Martinez have been excellent, Onana (even with the mistakes), Casemiro and Eriksen have been decent, and Malacia and Mount have barely played because of injuries, hardly the managers fault
Because he has always been bad with transfers. At Ajax he was bad with transfers too, he really wanted multiple players for too much money because he knew them and had worked with them, only to hardly ever play them. Only Antony is enough reason for it to be confirmed to be honest. He had worked with him for years, and anyone watching Ajax regularly knew he wasn’t that good. So Ten Hag should have known better than to let them spend so much money on him. Hence, bad at transfers.
ten Hag doesnt control how much mone is spent on players. He suggested players, that United doesnt have a competent scouting department is a different issue
Think about it for a second dude. There is a limited budget and so you can’t spend unlimited money. Buying Antony severely impacts the potential of other players coming. Do you seriously think there is no discussion about that? Come on man, the transfer fee is partly on him
That argument has always driven me crazy. Same with the slagging off of the scouting department. The same scouts that originally valued Antony at like 25m. Yet somehow ETH avoids the heat for what will go down as United's all time worst transfer. Its weird. For so many fans the man is infallible for some reason.
Rasmus has not been excellent. He cost £70m and United still are looking to sign a forward. Onana has been competent in the league while almost singlehandedly knocking united out of the CL. Casemiro has been a dreadful signing.
Because they have no back up strikers if he gets hurt or misses games. It’s not rocket science as to why you would sign another striker.
Rasmus has been a good signing. Price tag aside, he’s had a decent amount of goals with a pretty shocking support system. Onana has also been very good in the league - to say ‘competent’ is underplaying it quite a bit. And Case was pretty fucking good his first season, notably scoring some big goals for us.
>Rasmus has been a good signing. Rasmus had a good spell of ten games and a terrible return either side of it. The shocking support system is an interesting take since he's playing in front of Fernandes who many consider to be a world class creator. His link up play and positioning is atrocious. Onana has not been very good. He has been decent in the league and appalling in Europe while also being one of the most expensive keepers in football history. >And Case was pretty fucking good his first season, notably scoring some big goals for us. Casemiro will cost United around £160m over the life of his contract. He had one good season and then fell off a cliff. If the Saudis don't bail United out he'll be one of the worst purchases united have ever made.
The original comment was about ten Hag not signing good players, not about how much they cost. ten Hag cannot control how much is spent on a player
Yes, he absolutely can. He knew how much the transfers would cost and agreed to them.
City signed Haaland and still signed Alvarez. Klopp signed 2 players for one position as well. Do you expect United to only have 1 striker in the whole squad? > Casemiro has been a dreadful signing. Sure, if your memory goes to only 8 months at a time > Onana has been competent in the league while almost singlehandedly knocking united out of the CL. Onana has made key saves which dont make the highlights reel compared to his mistakes.
>City signed Haaland and still signed Alvarez. Klopp signed 2 players for one position as well. Do you expect United to only have 1 striker in the whole squad? Alvarez has played almost all his minutes at 10. >Sure, if your memory goes to only 8 months at a time He has physically fallen off a cliff after one year. There's absolutely no way of arguing it was anything other than a terrible signing. >Onana has made key saves which dont make the highlights reel compared to his mistakes. So does every keeper. You just spend more time watching your own team. Arsenal fans were trotting out the same excuse last season.
Holy shit wow, as a Liverpool fan I’m over the moon with this! Long may united finish 8th with a negative goal difference!
I don't think he'll last the season.
this is a mistake i hope not but it will be based on how horrible the team was last season.
I hope he never leaves ! Lol
I'm super happy about this, as someone who dislikes ManU as much as any club in the world.
I think this is the correct decision. We saw last season how good he was when having players available. Lisandro missing most of the season, Varane getting injured randomly all the time, missing both natural LBs (having to play a RB on the left) and Casemiro forgetting how to be a professional footballer are not his fault. If he can start the same two CBs 3 matches in a row, things will be different. I honestly think he can definitely be the right guy to head a long term project.
Good decision. Mark my words, kids! !RemindMe 11 months
🎼 two more years, it’s only two more years 🎵
Ajax are celebrating rn
They're turning Erik ten Hag up to eleven.
Joke
this is hilarious... .. I'd love to put money down against him being at the helm in another 12 months ManUre are in a heap of poop, and they're just digging themselves deeper and deeper into it - it's such a shame ;o)