The Footie Thread

[Pin-seeker]

Such a garbage post.

Sure, Utd probably had far far too many staff. But sure, keep them on just for the sake of it. Not like any other businesses make staff redundant.

I've never had a free lunch. Not sure how many people have free lunches. But let's slag off the ownership of Utd for deciding not to give out free lunches

That was actually my first thought when the the story came out.
Not sure if other clubs give free meals to all their employees.
but why should they?

 

[Billysboots]

Been a while since I read such a dense post missing the point totally.

Ratcliffe, has made 500 people in total redundant, 99% of them will not be Ferguson or an idiot earning £150k in a pointless role, they are normal hardworking people.

You keep a poor manager in palce and even extend his contract by a year and pay him millions when you sack him. You appoint a Director of Football and sack him 5 months later at a cost of millions.

You remove free meals, heck you don't even choose to subsidise food instead.

As a business leader it always has been really easy to punish the plebs while paying a fortune to those who in no way deserve it.

I mean and you want to applaud him, I am assuming you are on your knees and you nose is brown as well because he has played an absolute stinker and you think he is good. Oh by the way lets borrow a few billion more for a stadium while are stinking the place out.

Save a few hundred thousand here and there while peeing millions in bad decisions up the wall and you want to applaud him.....

What a joke

I’d perhaps have expanded on my post and dignified your comments with a reply, but I lost interest after your very first line.

 

[Reemul]

Such a garbage post.

Sure, Utd probably had far far too many staff. But sure, keep them on just for the sake of it. Not like any other businesses make staff redundant.

I've never had a free lunch. Not sure how many people have free lunches. But let's slag off the ownership of Utd for deciding not to give out free lunches

I never said keep them on BUT you are peeing millions up the wall and some idiot fan is saying Ratcliffe knows what he is doing while saving a small amount at the same time as peeing millions up the wall and saving peanuts and it wants applauding.

It's the look and treating those you should be valuing the most so poorly.

It seems Utd were well over staffed and the fat needed trimming but doing in the way it has been done while wasting 10 of millions and now borrowing billions real is very poor and for anyone to be clapping that idiot and saying maybe he know what he is doing is an absolute joke.

Be a decent compassionate employer, esecially just wasting £14 million on 2 absolute stinker decisions.

Regarding free lunches, I haven't either but my son and wife have, my son still did, until recently when he was downgraded to a subsidised lunch, it was well handled and discussed with them and the company hadn't wasted a fortune on really poor decisions unlike Utd.

Ratcliffe could take a dump on your center circle and some of you would lap it up.

 

[Reemul]

That was actually my first thought when the the story came out.
Not sure if other clubs give free meals to all their employees.
but why should they?

It's not why they should it's that they have for years and how you handle removing it while peeing £14 million on a few staff members you employed recently and fired rather rapidly don't you think

 

[Reemul]

I’d perhaps have expanded on my post and dignified your comments with a reply, but I lost interest after your very first line.

Hit the nail on the head I assume..

 

[Billysboots]

Such a garbage post.

Sure, Utd probably had far far too many staff. But sure, keep them on just for the sake of it. Not like any other businesses make staff redundant.

I've never had a free lunch. Not sure how many people have free lunches. But let's slag off the ownership of Utd for deciding not to give out free lunches

Quite. I was merely hinting at the fact that maybe, just maybe, Jim Ratcliffe and INEOS are on a road to trying to sort out years of crass mismanagement. I used the example of the body language expert to highlight just one of the ludicrous ways in which the club have been trying to squander money.

And the case of Alex Ferguson is another really good example. Here is a man who doesn’t want the money, and certainly doesn’t need it. He’s said himself he is quite content to continue to be an ambassador for the club, and his only wish is to be able to watch games at Old Trafford. The press have absolutely vilified Ratcliffe for no longer paying Ferguson for his time, totally disregarding the fact that this seems to be a totally amicable arrangement.

It seems quite clear that Manchester United have become a bloated, mismanaged entity which is largely unfit for purpose, on the pitch and off it. And yet Jim Ratcliffe cannot be applauded by a United fan for taking steps to sort out the mess? He’s not doing anything that any responsible senior manager in any organisation shouldn’t be doing.

And I’m dense for suggesting I support him? Wow.

 

[Billysboots]

Hit the nail on the head I assume..

You assume wrong.

 

[Pin-seeker]

It's not why they should it's that they have for years and how you handle removing it while peeing £14 million on a few staff members you employed recently and fired rather rapidly don't you think

Lots of businesses do it,cost cutting.
I feel for the people that lost their jobs,but it happens every day.
This is just a big story because it’s a big football club doing it.

 

[Tashyboy]

The bit I read from Scruffy Jim that pricked my ears was “ if I continue to get grief I will walk away”. Seriously
He is going to get nothing but grief. What I don’t understand is that scruffy Jim owns 20odd% of the club but is now seen to be running it.Why? What exactly are the Glaziers doing. They must be laughing their heads off seeing scruffy Jim get the flak that they used to get.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

The bit I read from Scruffy Jim that pricked my ears was “ if I continue to get grief I will walk away”. Seriously
He is going to get nothing but grief. What I don’t understand is that scruffy Jim owns 20odd% of the club but is now seen to be running it.Why? What exactly are the Glaziers doing. They must be laughing their heads off seeing scruffy Jim get the flak that they used to get.

The Glazers are playing him like a fiddle doing all their dirty work, and once he has the club will be sold to a Middle East buyer and Ratcliffe will get nothing.
However Ratcliffe doesnt look to good after the cycling team and Americas Cup goings on.
Sadly, as much as we want them to be, a footy club isnt a stock market quoted company and will always be run poorly in comparison mainly because the fans are never happy unless they win everything and buy every best player.

 

[Swango1980]

I never said keep them on BUT you are peeing millions up the wall and some idiot fan is saying Ratcliffe knows what he is doing while saving a small amount at the same time as peeing millions up the wall and saving peanuts and it wants applauding.

It's the look and treating those you should be valuing the most so poorly.

It seems Utd were well over staffed and the fat needed trimming but doing in the way it has been done while wasting 10 of millions and now borrowing billions real is very poor and for anyone to be clapping that idiot and saying maybe he know what he is doing is an absolute joke.

Be a decent compassionate employer, esecially just wasting £14 million on 2 absolute stinker decisions.

Regarding free lunches, I haven't either but my son and wife have, my son still did, until recently when he was downgraded to a subsidised lunch, it was well handled and discussed with them and the company hadn't wasted a fortune on really poor decisions unlike Utd.

Ratcliffe could take a dump on your center circle and some of you would lap it up.

So, you actually agree the bloated staff needed trimming?

In terms of wasted money. Buying and paying players and managers costs millions. Inevitably, there are always likey to be good and bad decisions. Just because you regret some of those decisions, doesn't mean you must no longer improve efficiencies across all areas of the business.

The free lunches was a lovely perk for staff, but not a necessity. If it was a necessity, then presumably they weren't getting paid enough.

 

[4LEX]

The bit I read from Scruffy Jim that pricked my ears was “ if I continue to get grief I will walk away”. Seriously
He is going to get nothing but grief. What I don’t understand is that scruffy Jim owns 20odd% of the club but is now seen to be running it.Why? What exactly are the Glaziers doing. They must be laughing their heads off seeing scruffy Jim get the flak that they used to get.

That's the real issue here.

Why would Ratcliffe buy 20%, take all the risk and do all the work only for the Glazers to benefit. He's also going to fund the new stadium. I presume there's clauses agreed for further transfer of shares to him providing he hits certain markers. He needs to get them out of the picture completely ASAP because he'll be tarred with the same brush.

 

[Swango1980]

That's the real issue here.

Why would Ratcliffe buy 20%, take all the risk and do all the work only for the Glazers to benefit. He's also going to fund the new stadium. I presume there's clauses agreed for further transfer of shares to him providing he hits certain markers. He needs to get them out of the picture completely ASAP because he'll be tarred with the same brush.

I guess he agreed with them that he would have full control of most / all footballing decisions. So, he can own his decisions. So he can give the odd interview and explain what he has done and what he will do.

I don't believe he is in a room with the Glazers, discussing what manager or player to sign, or what staff are required. And then the Glazers just over rule him and do what they want.

If Utd remain rubbish, he will get more and more criticism. If they get better, he may get a lot of positivity. The Glazers won't

 

[Red devil]

Been a while since I read such a dense post missing the point totally.

Ratcliffe, has made 500 people in total redundant, 99% of them will not be Ferguson or an idiot earning £150k in a pointless role, they are normal hardworking people.

You keep a poor manager in palce and even extend his contract by a year and pay him millions when you sack him. You appoint a Director of Football and sack him 5 months later at a cost of millions.

You remove free meals, heck you don't even choose to subsidise food instead.

As a business leader it always has been really easy to punish the plebs while paying a fortune to those who in no way deserve it.

I mean and you want to applaud him, I am assuming you are on your knees and you nose is brown as well because he has played an absolute stinker and you think he is good. Oh by the way lets borrow a few billion more for a stadium while are stinking the place out.

Save a few hundred thousand here and there while peeing millions in bad decisions up the wall and you want to applaud him.....

What a joke

One can make an argument without being personal and insulting, you know.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

I’ve not seen the interview this week with Jim Ratcliffe, but those doubting his business acumen and ability to run a football club perhaps need a rethink.

Take redundancies, for example. One of the posts Ratcliffe has done away with is the £150k a year “body language expert”. Seriously? Why on earth does a football club need a body language expert? Quite aside from the fact said person clearly never spent any time with Marcus Rashford, what an absolute waste of cash. If we’re doing away with posts like that, then it’s long overdue.

And it seems that Alex Ferguson wasn’t even remotely bothered about receiving financial benefit for being a club ambassador. All he was bothered about was having a seat for every home game.

Seems Ratcliffe may have some idea what he’s doing after all.

I don’t think there is any doubt that Radcliffe is an outstandingly successful businessman and has proven that beyond all doubt

But being a successful businessman and getting a football team successful is two different things

There have been many successful businessmen who haven’t been able to find success in sport

Man Utd is the 3rd club under the INEOS umbrella- the other two aren’t pulling up trees

He will no doubt help reduce some running costs - but the main reason for them losing so much money is the poor recruitment and the debt as opposed to meals in the canteen or a £40k fund for ex players

The key will be the appointments - so far imo he has failed a few times now with key appointments

The next one ( who replaces Ashworth ) will be the big one , get that wrong and the slide downwards could be even worse

 

[Tashyboy]

Re Utd, they are not the first club that will be going to a new stadium whilst carrying on as normal. City, Spurs, Chelsea, Everton to name but a few have all done it. Newcastle may be the next. Don’t get me wrong it’s a fine act balancing the balls to finance one side( stadium) and run the team. Unless you have rich owners. But Utds problems are deep and complex. Massive debts and massive bills to pay in future ( stadium). Coupled with the fact that the owners ( Glaziers) are stripping millions from the club. I can see it getting much worse before it gets better.

 

[Don Barzini]

City and Brighton 2-2, a point away is good but should have been all three

Just caught up with MOTD. Certainly looks like you guys had your fair share of chances to take all three!

Good result for me from a Forest point of view. Didn’t realise quite how close it’s looking around the CL spots at the moment.

Just imagine the scenario of three of the CL places being occupied by three out of Forest, Brighton, Newcastle, Villa and Bournemouth! I think the Sky pundits heads would all fall off or explode if that happened!

 

[Lord Tyrion]

City and Brighton 2-2, a point away is good but should have been all three

Blimey you missed some chances. A couple of your players will have had sleepless nights last night.

 

[Chip&Run]

Re Utd, they are not the first club that will be going to a new stadium whilst carrying on as normal. City, Spurs, Chelsea, Everton to name but a few have all done it. Newcastle may be the next. Don’t get me wrong it’s a fine act balancing the balls to finance one side( stadium) and run the team. Unless you have rich owners. But Utds problems are deep and complex. Massive debts and massive bills to pay in future ( stadium). Coupled with the fact that the owners ( Glaziers) are stripping millions from the club. I can see it getting much worse before it gets better.

Manchester United remind of that friend who thinks he should be dating Cameron Diaz but looks like Barry from Eastenders.

 

[Swango1980]

Think Fofana got away with one there