Someone's having a real laugh - sperm of gollum to Utd.

[KMD7]

Just now, Jack the Sipper said:

 Love how Twitter ties in Man U and their manager with the Europa League...

 

And trending alongside Ole out and Ferguson

[Elite]

He has zero excuses if they don't win anything this year. He's had the time and resources.

 

 

[TheDrowningMan]

17 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

He's a dogshit manager but with the resources to pack his team with quality they will win things in spite of him. Rather him be there as a leash than someone decent steps in.

They will, but as long as he’s there, Guardiola at City and Klopp performing near miracles (injuries notwithstanding) I’m hopeful that whatever he wins, it won’t be either of the big two.
 

Might get a bit dicey at times, but I’ll take them getting a strong third place and a CL semi or even final defeat (undone by his tactics) to keep him in position for another year or two. 

[sir roger]

I don't really understand this decision at all from the owners. What was the need ? He is at his premium job and nobody else would want him so why give him more money and a bigger payout when he gets sacked.There must also be plenty of more sensible supporters who don't see him as a great manager so not even a PR success.

[Bruce Spanner]

2 hours ago, sir roger said:

I don't really understand this decision at all from the owners. What was the need ? He is at his premium job and nobody else would want him so why give him more money and a bigger payout when he gets sacked.There must also be plenty of more sensible supporters who don't see him as a great manager so not even a PR success.

I think City being the cheating cunts they are hides a multitude of under performance from lots of teams and let’s them get away with being a bit useless as City are the barometer and is an easy excuse to make.

[aws]

4 hours ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

Just waiting for the Echo to say how it's like a new signing for Liverpool.

Not sure about that but it could save us millions in the long term. 

[Red_or_Dead]

Read somewhere that if, IF, he sees out his contract he'll be their third longest serving manager, after Busby and Ferguson.  He'll only have been there six years.  They don't really do stability do they?

 

Remember someone else posting, possibly in this thread, that Utd have never really established themselves in regard to successful managers, inasmuch, they had two outstanding managers in two disparate periods of their history; that they had no consistency of success outside of those

[rb14]

4 hours ago, sir roger said:

There must also be plenty of more sensible supporters who don't see him as a great manager

Just struggling with one part of that.

[Ron B]

3 hours ago, Red_or_Dead said:

Read somewhere that if, IF, he sees out his contract he'll be their third longest serving manager, after Busby and Ferguson.  He'll only have been there six years.  They don't really do stability do they?

I thought this sounded suspect. And... it seems like it’s not true. 
Pre-war they had Ernest Mangall (no, me neither) for nine years, and Jack Robson lasted seven years albeit covering most of WWI in that period. 
They fannied about a lot after Busby, and again after Ferguson, but the managers who already had a decent CV were often given more than long enough to make it happen - even if, like Big Ron, it was never going to happen and they always self-combusted when the going got tough. 

[magicrat]

4 hours ago, Red_or_Dead said:

Read somewhere that if, IF, he sees out his contract he'll be their third longest serving manager, after Busby and Ferguson.  He'll only have been there six years.  They don't really do stability do they?

 

 

Given Busby did 24 years and Slur 26 there wasnt really much time left for anyone else to put in much of a stint to be fair

[Red_or_Dead]

59 minutes ago, Ron B said:

I thought this sounded suspect. And... it seems like it’s not true. 
Pre-war they had Ernest Mangall (no, me neither) for nine years, and Jack Robson lasted seven years albeit covering most of WWI in that period. 
They fannied about a lot after Busby, and again after Ferguson, but the managers who already had a decent CV were often given more than long enough to make it happen - even if, like Big Ron, it was never going to happen and they always self-combusted when the going got tough. 

Lazy journalism strikes again!  I think I read it on the BBC, which sounds about their standard these days.

 

 

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, Ron B said:

I thought this sounded suspect. And... it seems like it’s not true. 
Pre-war they had Ernest Mangall (no, me neither) for nine years, and Jack Robson lasted seven years albeit covering most of WWI in that period. 
They fannied about a lot after Busby, and again after Ferguson, but the managers who already had a decent CV were often given more than long enough to make it happen - even if, like Big Ron, it was never going to happen and they always self-combusted when the going got tough. 

Maybe it was number of games? He's had a few cup runs hasn't he, so must be averaging 50+ games a season against managers who got 42 league games and just the FA cup? Or maybe even top flight, they were a bit of a yoyo team prior to WWII weren't they? 

[Razoray]

On 24/07/2021 at 21:29, magicrat said:

Given Busby did 24 years and Slur 26 there wasnt really much time left for anyone else to put in much of a stint to be fair

Busby left in 1970, 51 years ago. Ferguson was manager 25.5 years. During the other 25.5 years they have had 9 other managers who between them have won the following:

Division 2 title x 1.

FA Cup x 4

Europa League x 1

League Cup x 1. 

 

In the 25 years prior to Busby appointment they won the following:

Division 2 title x 1.

 

That's it. In the past 101 years they have won 6 trophies (and 2 Division 2 league titles) in the 50.5 years that they were not managed by Ferguson and Busby. 

The last 31 years have been a disappointment in Liverpool terms of winning trophies but we have still won 11 major trophies, including big ears twice and a league. 

They are a huge club but their successes have been reliant on 2 excellent managers.

[Pidge]

Fucking hell, you're right. Mourinho is like their fourth most successful manager ever... wow.

[Pete]

Fuck ‘em. All a bunch of cunts. 

[sir roger]

On 24/07/2021 at 17:03, rb14 said:

Just struggling with one part of that.

Not a high bar admittedly , but I get far more football sense talking to Man Utd fans than our noisy neighbours. 

[dockers_strike]

10 hours ago, Razoray said:

Busby left in 1970, 51 years ago. Ferguson was manager 25.5 years. During the other 25.5 years they have had 9 other managers who between them have won the following:

Division 2 title x 1.

FA Cup x 4

Europa League x 1

League Cup x 1. 

 

In the 25 years prior to Busby appointment they won the following:

Division 2 title x 1.

 

That's it. In the past 101 years they have won 6 trophies (and 2 Division 2 league titles) in the 50.5 years that they were not managed by Ferguson and Busby. 

The last 31 years have been a disappointment in Liverpool terms of winning trophies but we have still won 11 major trophies, including big ears twice and a league. 

They are a huge club but their successes have been reliant on 2 excellent managers.

This is bang on. Prior to Busby's appointment, they had won just 2 league titles since they were formed as Newton Heath. Their owners had to pump money into the club to stop it being bankrupt in their early years.

 

Busby's record was phenomenal in an era were transfer fees were still in their tens of thousands of pounds rather than hundreds. Sunderland had the most Division One titles with 6 but Busby won 5 in the time from his appointment to his retirement in 1970.

 

Anyone who was alive following Busby's retirement could watch their fall and see the eye watering appointments of the likes of Wilf McGuiness, Frank OFarrell, Docherty, Sexton etc. McGuiness was so bad Busby had to come out of retirement for a while. The relegation in 1974 was simply awesome!

[Bobby Hundreds]

Now they are that fucking rich they'll never fade away.

[Shitty Arse]

[aRdja]

I think Varane is a bit overrated but he’s still better than Lindelof or Bailly. If Sancho could replicate his form in the PL (and that’s a big if, having seen the likes of Keita, Kagawa and Mkhitaryan fail), then they would be a contender.

[JagSquared]

50 minutes ago, aRdja said:

I think Varane is a bit overrated but he’s still better than Lindelof or Bailly. If Sancho could replicate his form in the PL (and that’s a big if, having seen the likes of Keita, Kagawa and Mkhitaryan fail), then they would be a contender.

Tbh with the fees they have been paying over the last few years they absolutely should be contenders and this is a pivotal season for OGS who, should he fail to mount a title bid and go deep into the CL should be considered a complete failure.
 

that’s what I’ve been telling my United fan friends who have no real choice but to agree with that assessment after claiming they weren’t being backed financially and claiming others were simply buying titles (us too because of Alisson and VVD despite us selling Coutinho to buy them). If they can’t even buy a title after spending what they have they really should pack it in. 
 

the pressure really should be ramped up on them but the OGS media fan club will claim he needs time to bed in the new guys.

[Bobby Hundreds]

They'll challenge, they finished second last year and people can pull up every excuse as to why they want but they did, they signed a potential superstar in Sancho and a better defender than what they have. Shaw and Maguire will be full of beans. They've a really top selection of players enough that even Ole might not be able to fuck it up too much. 

 

Ultimately who knows, we can do 95 plus points but after the shitshow last season who knows if this group can do it again its a huge ask, city have 2 first 11s not as tiring a race when you have so many options the cheating fucks.

 

[m0e]

4 hours ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

They'll challenge, they finished second last year and people can pull up every excuse as to why they want but they did, they signed a potential superstar in Sancho and a better defender than what they have. Shaw and Maguire will be full of beans. They've a really top selection of players enough that even Ole might not be able to fuck it up too much. 

 

Ultimately who knows, we can do 95 plus points but after the shitshow last season who knows if this group can do it again its a huge ask, city have 2 first 11s not as tiring a race when you have so many options the cheating fucks.

 

We've got a much better team and squad than them.

 

A disastrous season by our current standards,  and we finished just behind them.

 

Sancho and Varane are not going to make up for us getting our defence and our midfield back.

 

Not by a long shot.

[Joey8FrogsLegs]

46 minutes ago, m0e said:

We've got a much better team and squad than them.

 

A disastrous season by our current standards,  and we finished just behind them.

 

Sancho and Varane are not going to make up for us getting our defence and our midfield back.

 

Not by a long shot.

 
Team yes, squad no.

[lebron]

1 minute ago, Joey8FrogsLegs said:

 
Team yes, squad no.

On paper I'd probably agree. I think most of their strength in depth is in the front third though. Their backups in the middle are about the same as ours, and our CBs are much better.