man united coach sacked .....

Just read this https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/premier-league/mourinho-fired-by-man-united-with-his-career-at-crossroads/ar-BBR6AVx ……. you just know that losing to Liverpool and man city was the deciding factors ……

They’re nowhere close to being relegated as they’re still sixth in the table. So it can’t be just their performance on the field.

Relegation for Manchester United is not a relevant matter. On Sunday, after losing to Liverpool, Mourinho stated that his players were not as good as the Liverpool players, and that United had no chance of winning the League; indeed, could hope to do no better than 4th. I don’t think that sat to well with the powers that be at Old Trafford.

Discussion of this is also ongoing in the Premier League thread. :slight_smile:

Don’t forget the draw at Southampton! Saints are awful.

It seems that Mourinho never bought a house and was living in a hotel his whole time with the team. I’m not sure the club got stuck with the bill or not but it would have been close to $700,000 just for the room not including room service or the mini bar.

Well when your best player, who was a big part in France just winning the World Cup, rides the bench due to friction with the manager…

Just wasn’t a good fit, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he goes elsewhere and wins. The media seems to think Pochettino is the prime target, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they are preparing to woo Zidane, although I don’t think he speaks any English at all. But he could be the pipeline to getting all that young French talent to Old Trafford.

It’s actually close to £716,000 which is about $903,000 US dollars.

That’s only £292,000 a year though. United’s wage bill is nearly £300 million a year, with Jose taking over £18m of that. I think they can afford it.

Under Sir Alex Ferguson (Man Utd manager 1986-2013), United won:

  • 13 Premier League titles
  • 5 FA Cups
  • 2 Champions’ League titles
  • 4 League Cups
  • 14 other trophies

In the Premier League over 27 seasons, their finishing positions were:

1st 13 times
2nd 6
3rd 3
4th 1
5th 2
6th 1
7th 1

So languishing in 6th place is seen as a disaster!

In Ferguson’s first six seasons United finished 11th, 2nd, 11th, 13th, 6th and 2nd, before finally winning the league in his seventh season in charge. The rest, as they say, is history. Someone on the board must have liked him!

Yes, but you are forgetting that Ferguson won the FA Cup in the fourth year, the UEFA Cup-Winners Cup in the fifth year, and the League Cup in the sixth year, before breaking through in the seventh year to finally win the Premier League. So it wasn’t like he was failing on all fronts. And the popular story has it that, had he not won the third-round FA Cup tie against Nottingham Forest in that fourth year to progress, he would have been sacked.

I’ve not forgotten any of that (I was there for most of it). Mourinho won all of those as well (Europa League instead of CWC) but it only took him two seasons, not six. The point I’m making is that times have changed and expectations have changed. Clubs are much more fickle with their managers than they used to be.

Not sure that’s true. Go back to the 80s and see if average tenure was significantly longer.

What has changed at United is that minor trophies and mid-level placings are no longer acceptable. This isn’t just because Sir Alex set a high bar. It also has to do with the financial aspect of running a club at the top level. Failure to secure a Champions League place is devastating financially; failing to do it more than once in a blue moon would run the risk of forcing a team like United to lose its place among the elite of the world. Sadly, in England, the reality is that six teams are competing for four spots, whereas in Spain, Germany, France and Italy, there are actually fewer top of the top teams than spots available in the UCL. United’s management understand that they cannot accept being “top-6”; they have to be “top-4” (top-3, really) to keep the gravy train running.

Which is why Mourinho ran out of time. His sacking comes on the heels of his pronouncement following the Liverpool game that United would have trouble finishing in 4th. Either that is because United don’t have the players to do so, or it is because he wasn’t managing them in a way to get them to do so. If it is the former, given that a significant portion of the squad available to him was chosen by him himself, what does that say?

There is an aspect to the story that does highlight an unsavory trend in the PL: the ability of players any more to manipulate the sacking of their manager. There are a number of managers in the PL, and recently sacked managers, who’s positions are/were untenable simply because the players decided they didn’t want to play for that person, and started tanking things on the field. Roy Keane is absolutely right to state that Paul Pogba’s behaviour is shameful, and Pogba wasn’t the only one. A similar story is shaping up at Leicester City, where Claude Puel is facing reported rebellion in the dressing room over his attempts to change the team’s football strategy. This despite the fact that Puel has Foxes firmly mid-table, just a win or two away from sniffing at 7th, even before today’s fantastic take-down of Chelsea. That trend is not a good thing.