Someone's got to ask it. Yeah, it sounds rabble-rousing. But it's true nonetheless. Our glorious leader - one of the 5 greatest English managers ever (and perhaps the very best) is finished. His tactics are unimpressive, his selection bizarre, his purchases foolish. Only his motivational ability remains, and powers his teams to wins over Arsenal, only to collapse for teams like Pompey (can't go at full tilt constantly, no matter how inspiring the manager). He's done. It's sad. It's not really his fault. Everyone becomes outdated, given enough time. Much like the survival rate always drops to 0 over a sufficiently lengthy period of time. In my opinion, the real question has become: will United' sentimentality prevent the club from pushing SAF upstairs before, or after, the team has lost the chance of remaining the best football club in England (on the field, it'll be quite a while until anyone catches up off the field). I'm curious on people's views around this. There isn't much of a call for Fergie to be replaced, despite so many errors. The squad has underperformed three out of the last four years (if you view salary as a judgement of worth...and if not, Fergie's a fool for keeping bad players). He can't blame the players (since he recruited them). And he can't blame the club for spending inadequate amounts of money (even if you think they should have spent more, they've still spent more than anyone else). Should we keep him? If so, why? Is he still a great manager? Is he still good, and you're unwilling to gamble? Or is it just that he's "earned" his right to retire at his leisure, damn the fortunes of the club. I'm sick of it. THere's no way that a team that spends this much money on players should struggle against some of the opposition. Is the Pompey loss that bad? No, they're a good team. Rednapp has done a fantastic job acquiring good talent at low prices. But collectively, the draws and losses of the last two years have added up. The lack of goals is appalling. ANy manager (other than Wenger or a new guy) would be sacked for Fergie's cost/reward ratio over the last two years. When does Fergie pay the price for underperformance? I admire those who have patience. Maybe I don't have enough. Maybe I expect too much. I'm not a bandwagoner - I'll support United no matter what they do - but it's time to sack Fergie before long-lasting damage is done. /rant over
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? At first I thought I was dreaming and we had won last week and this was Father Ted's punishment!! Then I woke up and realised Im actually replying to a lunatic. Hmmmm.
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? I agree with you, but I'm not sure how to express it without getting replies like "You glory hunter!!" or "After all Fergie did for us, u want to sack him!!!???" But it's true. Look all around you. I doubt u see any managers around who've been managing their teams since the 80s, winning major honors. I think the club needs a fresh start, with some fresh ideas. We need to be viewed as 2nd or 3rd best, and not as some super power.Then we need a manager who is younger than Fergie, hungry for success and a good tactician. We also need to get rid of some players who have gone flat and bring some hungry players in. Yes, easier said than done, but it has to be done sometime.
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? Average it out. Three points in six games (counting nothing of the games before Arsenal). That's not enough to win the EPL. Even in a bad year. Beat the best team in the EPL. Lose to a slightly-above average-team. That's a good thing - if your objective is 4th-6th. It's a bad thing if your objective is higher. Take into account that we can't seem to score (except off of penalties and when our opponenent is throwing everything forward) and I can't see how we're doing anything other than underachieving. Forget everything Fergie did prior to four years ago. What has our team done, in the last four years, that would be breaking more than even with spending more than any other team in the EPL? Look at SAF's career - and he's the best. Look at the last four years - and he's somewhat below average. I don't think SAF's a fool - but I do think we'd be better off with many manager's out there.
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? We need a Man Utd revolution. Out with all of the old and in with the new. The only problem is that there isn't a viable alternative to Ferguson at the moment. That's a lie, I know of one but he's at Chelski. Time to start looking at options I think.
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? I think a good manager to try and get would be Martin O'neil...he has done some pretty good stuff with the shite squad that he's got...that or Harry Redknap, he put out a more attacking lineup then we did today, a 4-3-3 v. our boring 4-4-2
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? We dominated play against Pompey, and had shitloads of chances to score but our forwards and midfielders failed to finish. We played a mainly unchanged team from the one that just beat Arsenal (which was people's main gripe about him earlier). Hold on, I just re-read Rick's initial reply...
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? Yeah... the game against Pompey was what people who play hattrick (online soccer management game) a WTF game. Our possesion, build up and final ball was better than our opponent's however, for whatever reason, we did not finish and they did resulting in a loss for a team that probably deserved to win. I know to some it sounds like whining but we really should have won that game. Rooney had several shots he could/should have burried. Scholes had an easy goal scoring chance while the game was scoreless as did Silvestre. Organization-wise we were good but we missed that fire and desire to win imo. One of the few criticisms of Fergie I can provide is not starting Keane. You want your best 11 on the field at the start even if u have to sub one or two off. Another problem I had is not playing Saha (although I did not expect Saha to play). We played with Smith, Rooney and Scholes who all specialize in mazy movement and runs into and around the box but none of them are true targets. Smith can play that role, but he did not seem to be under that direction for this match. Also, when down a goal and needing 2, (not a draw) why bring on a defensive midfielder? Pointless... we should have let Saha and Smith play upfront and let Rooney and Scholes run the midfield or Rooney and Saha with Smith in midfield because Pompey were bunkering most of the game especially after taking the lead...
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? I think haven is referring to the problem that you seem to have way too many games like that. At a certain point, you have to blame the manager for failing to spot such problems. What was the last game you won that you thought back to yourself and said "man, we had no business winning that one" or "a draw would have been a fair result"? No, the Arsenal game doesn't count.
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? 'Team in Transition' is becoming an annoying cliche, but that's what I honestly feel United is. Our squad is no longer the one that won the treble in '99. We are moving forward to the next generation, the next United squad that will win everything there is to win. It usually takes a helluva long time for this transition to occur (liverpool seem to be towards the end of theirs, which has taken decades), and for the United team to still be a contender for the league title during this period is great, and being in the CL year in year out is a superb return for a budding side. It seems SAF has brought on this transition very fast, which we should all commend him for. The purchase and success of youngsters like Ronaldo, Rooney and Pique all go to show that SAF is putting emphasis on building a powerful young squad. It is rather unselfish of him to do so, as he could have splashed out on bigger (older) names for instant success in the last few years of his tenure, but instead he has started to build solid foundations for a squad which (he said a few weeks ago) he may not be around to see at its best by buying young talent rather than established superstars, a move haven has unfairly labeled as 'foolish purchases'. Obviously, at a club like United, success is mandatory, even at the lower points of the club's fortunes in long periods, and that IMO is why we've seen the arrival of Saha and Heinze, players who will improve immensely at the club but will be on the older side when Roo's generation is at the prime, very much like Keano and G Nev in the squad right now. This gradual transition is key, as veterans are every bit as important in a team's success as talented speedy youngsters and prime-of-their-career superstars. Though it is my stand that Keano should be replaced in the United 11 immediately, he is the best example of these veterans in the United team, holding things together as the youngun's mature and learn what it is to be a United player, a vital ingredient to success. No one here will deny that United is in between two great squads. We should praise our manager that we are still as successful as we are dispite this. Looking back on all the managers we've had, and even comparing them to other great managers world-wide, there's no-one I'd rather have grooming our young talent into the great players their potential promises they'll be. Unfortunately, sir Alex won't be our manager at the prime of these player's careers, but for now, I am 100% behind SAF and I think any United fan should be as well.
Re: How much longer can we afford to keep Fergie? I back Fergie. Its the board that pisses me off, like we need 30 million to get Gerrard.
im sorry but i think this is ridiculous, i just fail to see how replacing Ferguson will improve us, obviously we are not playing the way we hoped and thought but these phases have happened all the way through the ferguson era, players like Scholes, Keane, Saha, van Nistelrooy are players that will inevitably start playing better and when they do the difference will be big. All of the players have Ferguson's respect and are loyal to him, one of my worries is that when Ferguson goes some players may go with him, and who would we replace him with at this point in the season? the simple answer there is no one who stands out who we could put in place and think the glory will definately return, people talk about O'Neill, and i wouldnt be against that in a few years but Celtic are not in the same kettle of fish as man united. I dont want to keep him because of what he's done in the past i want to keep him because i have the faith he will have a positive outcome for the future of Man United, it may take a couple of seasons but i have no doubt that in a few years time we will win the league again and even the champions league
The forwards failed to finish. That's a brilliant ********ing excuse...since the manager that I'm complaining of picked every single one for a combined price of (excluding RVN) above 45m. Right. It's not his fault at all if they can't finish. As for the board cheaping out on not buying Gerrad...why on earth is that an excuse? We've spent more money than any other team in the league over the last 5 years. Over the last two, we're rivaled only by one team's purchases. And the lack of midfield talent can be blamed on the board? That's insane. Essentially, that's saying "Fergie's a great manager provided we give him not only more money than any other manager...but excessively more!" Sorry, doesn't cut it. The board can be cheap - I agree. But the question isn't whether Gerrard (or someone else) could be bought, but whether the results are acceptable given the amount of money that has been spent. Note: not a single person backing forward has responded without: (1) blaming the players that Ferguson himself chose or (2) implying that Fergie is somehow "owed" for past success. If it's (2), fine. I half-way, sort-of, slightly see where you're coming from (though I think it just delays the inevitable). But to claim anything else...well, I haven't seen the argument worth its salt. Possession is great. But is anybody else not amused by the remarkable # of games that we seem to "dominate" yet fail to win? Surely, the pattern is more than luck at this point.
Yeah, its a baffling and disturbing trend really. When I watch games like that, I see our team controlling things, but they're not really into it, not going for it. Against Arsenal they constantly went at Arsenal, they wanted it and got it. But when we lose to these supposed 'inferior' teams, it's like the team lies around hoping for things to happen, instead of going for the jugular. It's frustrating. They act cool when they're 1-0/2-0 down, when they should be like riled up ants. I think the team needs to be more gung ho.
Oh ye of such little faith United are not too far removed from our last title season when they made a great turnaround and managed to take back the title from Arsenal. Last year with Rio getting suspended we entered a decline. It was not helped by a terrible string of injuries and losing a lot of players to International commitments. Am i trying to excuse this teams performence? No! Does SAF need excuses? No! This team has some weak spots and has some players who have not played very well. To an extent things like squad selection are controllable by the coach, but for things like performence its not always at his power to make a player perform to a certain standard. I support SAF and think he'll be gone when he thinks its time to go. We are in a transitional period as we bring in more youth, yet still we are not done in the league or in Europe. At the end of the year if we continue to struggle the ownership of United will make a choice.
Explicitly, no? But I can hardly start a "SAF stinks" post every week. But Saturday did nothing to change my mind about the situation (nor will you find any posts by me to the contrary). I didn't share in the general optimism after that game. First, it was only one game. Secondly, United generally play better against superior opposition because of their general inability to break down a defensive team. Better teams tend to attack United more. And third, I think United just match-up well against Arsenal, generally. I've always thought SAF probably should have stepped down when he originally planned to do so. Nothing - not even the EPL triumph of two seasons ago - has changed my mind. The past four years have been characterized by mild underachievement under a dictatorial manager who can't blame anybody but himself (or, realistically, calculated risks that haven't paid off). Sheesh. I think some of you people would want to retain SAF if we finished 10th.
Do not worry Haven, there's a big "See, I told you so!" sign reserved for you if we don't win the league ever again...
Quite honestly, my memory could be mistaken here, but wasn't it your position last year that SAF got a free pass for the season because of injuries, the squad needing time to jell, grow up, etc...but that you'd start questioning his tenure if the team underperformed this season as well? If so, do you still stand by that comment? Obviously, it's too early to judge the season...but the early returns are poor, I think everyone here can agree.
No one here can accuse SAF of being a brilliant manager tactically or otherwise over the last 4 years. When our players are less than brilliant we clamor for them to be sold or benched... when Keane or Giggs or Scholes is criticised we defend them because of the history with the team they have - but after a certain point we must hold them accountable... I am not saying these players or SAF has to go... just saying that when it is time to go a fan may not be the best to decide because of our loyalties and memories.