Reported by the Mail that SAF wanted United to hire Walsh. Ed rejected the suggestion and instead wants to hire Darren Fletcher. Now, front what the article says, it seems Fletcher is wanted because Ed is impressed by him, is a link due to being ex-United player and will be given a say in recruitment /playing style, but ultimately Ed and Judge will deal with things as more or less as they are now.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7155701/Sir-Alex-Ferguson-recommended-Steve-Walsh-Manchester-United-Ed-Woodward-rejected-advice.html
Other, somewhat related, reports say Ed has made signing AWB his priority and will wait to complete other deals after that is completed. - This one is hard to believe as there is no need to wait for this to be completed before other signings.
Steve Walsh and Darren Fletcher
posted on 19/6/19
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Super Ed (U22147)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Super Ed (U22147)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Super Ed (U22147)
posted 7 seconds ago
Nobody would be moaning about Ed acquiring Sanchez, all in for £65m if the player had been a success.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He didn't and he hasn't so an irrelevant comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It isnt irrelevant at all. You are using hindsight to beat Ed up, when if the player had been a success, nobody would have cared about the cost.
--------------------------
He should have done his due diligence on the player before authorising the £65m deal, don't you think? A lot of Arsenal fans knew that his legs had gone after his last injury there and were happy to see him leave. We have seen with Torres what difference that loss of pace can mean.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even if the manager wanted him?
-------------------
Yes. He wants to be in charge of the football side of the business then he needs to take ownership of that. Ultimately he was Jose's boss. Anyone who would sanction a £65m deal at their underlings say-so without doing any due diligence on the acquisition is an absolute moron.
==========================
Reading Elvis's reply, he doesn't actually say it as you mean it, now does he?
"He wants to be in charge of the football side of the business then he needs to take ownership of that."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What happens if Sanchez goes elsewhere because Ed refuses to meet his demands ?
And apply the same to Joses CB, is this Ed not backing the manager or doing his job well?
posted on 19/6/19
We tried but we did not get him. Same happened with Lucas Moura (wouldn't pay the price) and Hazard ( agent fees). In both cases we made attempts to sign them. I don't know about the Moura case; we signed Kagawa instead of Hazard that year.
The same can't apply to Jose as the information we have said Ed refused to sign one, little to do with money.
posted on 19/6/19
We don’t have that information.
Many have said all that indicates Ed didn’t try is the absence of the CB..
posted on 19/6/19
And Jose making a comment about it and calling himself the head coach...
posted on 19/6/19
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
And Jose making a comment about it and calling himself the head coach...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what. Manager or head coach, neither negotiate contracts or fees.
posted on 19/6/19
Then you've missed the point about Jose's comment. We do have that information. You just choose to ignore it.
posted on 20/6/19
Tottenham Manager Pochettino, in his interview a few years ago quite accurately put what the difference is in the two roles. He said-
“If you are the manager, you decide many things about the club. But if you are a head coach, your responsibility is to play better, try to improve the players and to get positive results.”
“At Southampton, I was a manager. My responsibility was not only to coach the team. With Tottenham, I am a head coach. A head coach is head of your department. My department is to train the team.”
posted on 20/6/19
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 38 seconds ago
Tottenham Manager Pochettino, in his interview a few years ago quite accurately put what the difference is in the two roles. He said-
“If you are the manager, you decide many things about the club. But if you are a head coach, your responsibility is to play better, try to improve the players and to get positive results.”
“At Southampton, I was a manager. My responsibility was not only to coach the team. With Tottenham, I am a head coach. A head coach is head of your department. My department is to train the team.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither head coaches or managers negotiate contracts or fees though, so what did it matter what Jose called himself
posted on 20/6/19
It means Ed said no to Jose.
Negotiating fees and contracts doesn't come into it.
posted on 20/6/19
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator