nitrogen:


But David Gill knew nothing about football. He was also a banker and a chartered accountant before he joined man Utd. In fact, he joined as a finance director before working his way up.

So, you wanna tell me why knowing ‘football side of things’ is needed for those roles?

cc afrodoc

Maybe maybe not but David Gill didn't have absolute power like Ed. He worked hand in hand with Ferguson
Tell me who scrutinise Woodward's decision?

Let's like you see nothing wrong with some of the decision Woodward makes from type of coach, to signing of players.

@Patrickmuf, i didn't think "shut up" was a serious insult, especially when the perspective(banter) is indicated. But when someone asks me "have i been told to shut up in a village meeting before", on thinking about it, that's not something i would want. So i would think some peope here expect interactions resembling real life on this platform. That's understandable. And i apologize if that offends you. I never meant to insult you. However i would like to use this opportunity to tell you that, do not presume to know what anybody else is thinking. Some of us consider it an act of condescension. I will endeavour not to use such words in any post here again. Peace.

elrony:


Be like youth team candidate

it's like they want to develop or sign the best next thing.

benji93:
Yes i can, since the argument isn't supposed to be serious. Besides "Shut up" is not an insult, at least not when i have included a smiley face at the end of my post.And i specifically used it cos he assumed he knows what i am thinking. Maybe it's you guys that have such thin skin, that you cannot recognize simple banter. And oh, i did not know people still wander about finding people they can punch. . Nonsense.

Go and tell your father "shut up" while smiling since it's not an insult.

Or rather head to any viewing centre and tell anyone older than u to shut up. While at it, be smiling at the person.

Ode.

Panther7:
Maybe maybe not but David Gill didn't have absolute power like Ed. He worked hand in hand with Ferguson
Tell me who scrutinise Woodward's decision?

Let's like you see nothing wrong with some of the decision Woodward makes from type of coach, to signing of players.

Let’s break this down.

David didn’t have to choose a manager during his time. In fact, when he was leaving, himself + Fergie gave us Moyes.

Also, he was always ready to work with the manager to identify players. No decision making process there, it’s same as having Matt Judge get OGS’s list and securing an approval from the CEO and Woody to go buy the players. Maybe, Matt delays the process because he wants to ensure he gets good deals, of course, he will be appraised based on that. Meanwhile, if David was occupying Woody’s role before he resigned in 2013, then he had absolute power. No one to report to.

Again, I don’t see the need to have someone that knows football side of things replace or join Woodward before we can start winning trophies.

odizeey:

Omo. Especially when you no too get money.

Because they know that the person is useless.

nitrogen:


Because they know that the person is useless.

Omo.

nitrogen:


But David Gill knew nothing about football. He was also a banker and a chartered accountant before he joined man Utd. In fact, he joined as a finance director before working his way up.

So, you wanna tell me why knowing ‘football side of things’ is needed for those roles?

cc afrodoc

David Gill had the ultimate equalizer which was Sir Alex Ferguson. That is the difference.

It is clear to most of us now that SAF was able to make a broken system work. There is no SAF now which means the broken system has to be fixed.

We won because of SAF DESPITE our outdated system of running the club. If you can't understand this then i can't help you.

P.S Your stance would have made sense only if the Woodward, Judge, Arnold combo had brought on the field success. But it has not, and yet you want us to persist with the same system despite it being clear that it is not working.

We keep changing player after player and manager after manager YET the only people who have remained in position since our struggles started should not be questioned, at least according to you.

benji93:
@Patrickmuf, i didn't think "shut up" was a serious insult, especially when the perspective(banter) is indicated. But when someone asks me "have i been told to shut up in a village meeting before", on thinking about it, that's not something i would want. So i would think some peope here expect interactions resembling real life on this platform. That's understandable. And i apologize if that offends you. I never meant to insult you. However i would like to use this opportunity to tell you that, do not presume to know what anybody else is thinking. Some of us consider it an act of condescension. I will endeavour not to use such words in any post here again. Peace.

No qualms bro.

afrodoc2:


David Gill had the ultimate equalizer which was Sir Alex Ferguson. That is the difference.

It is clear to most of us now that SAF was able to make a broken system work. There is no SAF now which means the broken system has to be fixed.

We won because of SAF DESPITE our outdated system of running the club. If you can't understand this then i can't help you.

P.S Your stance would have made sense only if the Woodward, Judge, Arnold combo had brought on the field success. But it has not, and yet you want us to persist with the same system despite it being clear that it is not working.

We keep changing player after player and manager after manager YET the only people who have remained in position since our struggles started should not be questioned, at least according to you.

But we tweaked the system after David left, because he had all the powers (negotiations, approving etc.). Now we have Matt, Arnold and Woody. Either systems are used by top football clubs in Europe. Not all leading clubs have 'football' directors, and very few football directors knew stuffs about football before joining.

Come to think of it, the combo of David Gill and Fergie worked because Fergie was a very good manager, and David was excellent even though he had no footballing experience but a good manager. See why the manager role is key.

nitrogen:


But we tweaked the system after David left, because he had all the powers (negotiations, approving etc.). Now we have Matt, Arnold and Woody. Either systems are used by top football clubs in Europe. Not all leading clubs have 'football' directors, and very few football directors knew stuffs about football before joining.

Come to think of it, the combo of David Gill and Fergie worked because Fergie was a very good manager, and David was excellent even though he had no footballing experience but a good manager. See why the manager role is key.

So are you saying we changed a system that was working for a system that does not work?

elrony:


Agenda must agend.

nitrogen:


But we tweaked the system after David left, because he had all the powers (negotiations, approving etc.). Now we have Matt, Arnold and Woody. Either systems are used by top football clubs in Europe. Not all leading clubs have 'football' directors, and very few football directors knew stuffs about football before joining.

Come to think of it, the combo of David Gill and Fergie worked because Fergie was a very good manager, and David was excellent even though he had no footballing experience but a good manager. See why the manager role is key.

If you are banking on getting another manager like SAF easily instead of improving your system you might just be on a long thing.

We have sacked and appointed 4 different managers now, each one with a style different from the others, but there has been no real improvement.

Why don't you want us to sack Arnold, Judge, Woodward and see if there will be an improvement. After all they are the only constants in this era of mediocrity of the club.

afrodoc2:


So are you saying we changed a system that was working for a system that does not work?

Well, they kept the 'working' system until 2015 or so, Woody was in charge of everything till they made Matt the 'director of fooball'. Matt gets a list from the manager, secures approvals from the CEO and Woody, before going ahead to negotiate and close the deals.

Sancho not in Dortmund's match day squad

nitrogen:


Well, they kept the 'working' system until 2015 or so, Woody was in charge of everything till they made Matt the 'director of fooball'. Matt gets a list from the manager, secures approvals from the CEO and Woody, before going ahead to negotiate and close the deals.

Okay but now that it is obvious that this system is not working you don't want them sacked?

afrodoc2:


If you are banking on getting another manager like SAF easily instead of improving your system you might just be on a long thing.

We have sacked and appointed 4 different managers now, each one with a style different from the others, but there has been no real improvement.

Hmmmmm, I am not saying we should get a SAF, I am saying that we should continue to sack and hire. That's working for many clubs. The managers and players that will come and go, most times, the executives and directors stay.

Why don't you want us to sack Arnold, Judge, Woodward and see if there will be an improvement. After all they are the only constants in this era of mediocrity of the club.

Again, the managers and players that will come and go. Also, Sacking Arnold, Judge and Woodward at the same time will destabilize the club. Number one, they've been with the club for years, secondly, the commercial side is booming even though we are going through some issues on the pitch, it's the commercial side that makes us stay afloat, finally, do you know what it will take to replace them? One thing I would suggest is to see if Matt can be replaced with a football person, but if you do that, then who negotiates? because a football person may not be able to negotiate and close tranfers o.

delkuf:
The report this morning is telles is going on international break on Sunday so how will United going to sign him

Let's see how things unfold.

nitrogen:


Hmmmmm, I am not saying we should get a SAF, I am saying that we should continue to sack and hire. That's working for many clubs. The managers and players that will come and go, most times, the executives and directors stay.



Again, the managers and players that will come and go. Also, Sacking Arnold, Judge and Woodward at the same time will destabilize the club. Number one, they've been with the club for years, secondly, the commercial side is booming even though we are going through some issues on the pitch, it's the commercial side that makes us stay afloat, finally, do you know what it will take to replace them? One thing I would suggest is to see if Matt can be replaced with a football person, but if you do that, then who negotiates? because a football person may not be able to negotiate and close tranfers o.

I don't get you. Are you saying that despite all the comical transfer windows we have all witnessed, and despite all the sacking and appointment of managers not working Judge, Arnold, Woodward have been excellent and none of them bears any responsibility in the position the club is in now?

Are you saying it is the fault of LVG, JM, Moyes, Ole only even though none of them was here for more than 2-3 years but Arnold, Judge, Woodward who have been here for an average of about 10 years have no share in this blame cake?

Why do we need 3 money men who all went to school together and who are obviously struggling with transfer negotiations? Why don't you want our transfer windows to be better organized and executed?

Why are you so quick to sack coaches after 1-2 seasons but still want to keep transfer negotiators who are currently the laughing stock of Europe in office for several years?

Omo see camera angle for under-18s against Man City. E be like say the camera man lie down for ground. Resemble that shameful Naija match.

Sacking those guys will destabilize the club but changing managers every 2 years is not detrimental to stability. In your own words, kontinue.

nitrogen:


Hmmmmm, I am not saying we should get a SAF, I am saying that we should continue to sack and hire. That's working for many clubs. The managers and players that will come and go, most times, the executives and directors stay.



Again, the managers and players that will come and go. Also, Sacking Arnold, Judge and Woodward at the same time will destabilize the club. Number one, they've been with the club for years, secondly, the commercial side is booming even though we are going through some issues on the pitch, it's the commercial side that makes us stay afloat, finally, do you know what it will take to replace them? One thing I would suggest is to see if Matt can be replaced with a football person, but if you do that, then who negotiates? because a football person may not be able to negotiate and close tranfers o.

benji93:
Sacking those guys will destabilize the club but changing managers every 2 years is not detrimental to stability. In your own words, kontinue.

E be things

Chelsea fans dey detrimental oh, the viewing center close to my house them dey there dey shout man U!!!

I no understand we dey drag something with this Chelsea abgeros

What a makanaki something.

So Man Utd now depend on Matt Judge for stability.

A fullback scoring and assisting.

Things that are not allowed in the red side of Manchester.

KingAlabi:
Chelsea fans dey detrimental oh, the viewing center close to my house them dey there dey shout man U!!!

I no understand we dey drag something with this Chelsea abgeros

Rent free bro.

Shekpeteris will always use United to measure the relevance of their club.

Chelsea fans are about to launch in. Over. The Agberos are lurking around. Over. Be at alert, comrades. Over.

Lana1:
Rent free bro.

Shekpeteris will always use United to measure the relevance of their club.

I just tire

Dem win dem go compare
Dem loose dem go still compare

E be things

weedtaker:
A fullback scoring and assisting.

Things that are not allowed in the red side of Manchester.

That day will come

KingAlabi:
Sancho not in Dortmund's match day squad

Still doesn't change anything

He should better play Football

The Woodward we know won't meet Dortmund's Demand

afrodoc2:


I don't get you. Are you saying that despite all the comical transfer windows we have all witnessed, and despite all the sacking and appointment of managers not working Judge, Arnold, Woodward have been excellent and none of them bears any responsibility in the position the club is in now?

Are you saying it is the fault of LVG, JM, Moyes, Ole only even though none of them was here for more than 2-3 years but Arnold, Judge, Woodward who have been here for an average of about 10 years have no share in this blame cake?

Why do we need 3 money men who all went to school together and who are obviously struggling with transfer negotiations? Why don't you want our transfer windows to be better organized and executed?

Why are you so quick to sack coaches after 1-2 seasons but still want to keep transfer negotiators who are currently the laughing stock of Europe in office for several years?

Well, that is how it works. Execs dont get sacked easily, managers and players leave. Meanwhile, if you sack the three of them, our commercial side will suffer, and there is no assurance that out football side will pick up. Do you want to go through both issues at the same time? We might just be competing with relegation bound clubs within 2 years.

Meanwhile, Woody and Arnold dont negotiate, you can turn your attention to Matt, he takes his time. Only issue is, if you sack him, and put a football person, nothing will change, particularly with transfers.

We need to understand 2 things: we dont need a football person before we can get it right because most successful clubs dont. Also, we need to continue to sack managers for us to win trophies because most successful clubs do it!

Nezzjnr:

Still doesn't change anything

He should better play Football

The Woodward we know won't meet Dortmund's Demand

The slightest hope United fans have
Yet you still kill it

How far na