United, Van Gaal, Guardiola and me.

While SkySports' coverage of the transfer deadline day may have now become an insipid affair to what was once considered to be genuinely interesting and entertaining, undoubtedly the story emerging out of Manchester City today is probably the most significant football news event this year. The appointment of Pep Guardiola as manager is an enormous statement for the club. Not only does it represent a profound declaration of intent among other clubs in England and across the rest of Europe, but it also highlights the relative decline in footballing means of their city rivals Manchester United.

There are plenty of column inches already highlighting why Louis van Gaal should not remain as United's manager. His poor relationship and handling of the media, his tactical intransigence and oddities, the turgid and boring football, his poor grasp and understanding of English.

Van Gaal is not entirely culpable, in fact, it is fair to say that while the current prevailing winds are far from conducive and will likely lead to his dismissal or otherwise early departure, he brought in a degree of stability to a side unnerved following David Moyes' short stint as manager. Additionally, while United's style is far removed from the teams Old Trafford was used to watching, van Gaal has strengthened United's defensive base, overseen the emergence of Chris Smalling as a international defender and brought back Champions League football (albeit with an early group stage exit to the Europe League).

United old boys have been quick to put the boot in where possible. Most notably, Paul Scholes in his punditry for BT Sport did not hide his conceit towards the style and attitude of the manager. Rio Ferdinand and former Liverpool player, manager and now pundit Graeme Souness have questioned whether United have lost their edge and leaders within the dressing room. Gary Neville pointed out that United fans should recognise that the United of old was just that, in the past. Former CEO David Gill also publicly stated that the quality of football was not what Old Trafford expect.

I think many fans recognise this and understand that 'pragmatic' football is essential for picking up points. I think United fans also recognise that the huge investment, sale of squad players and the exodus of senior players in recent years was necessary. By all means, the loss of the likes of Darren Fletcher, Jonny Evans, Rio Ferdinand, Patrice Evra may not be ideal in terms of the match and trophy winning experience, but nonetheless, underinvestment over the medium term only allows rivals to catch up with you.

What United fans will not understand or like is why has it come to this. Why is supposedly the world's third richest club and England's most successful team slipping away from Europe and England's elite? Was Guardiola's decision a reflection of the current state of affairs? City have a better squad, bigger transfer budget, better infrastructure, while United have withered. Was United a viable option for a coach like Pep?

Why didn't United try to sign the likes of Dele Ali when he emerged last season? Would the likes of Harry Kane prefer to remain at Tottenham rather than move to Manchester? After the failed signing of Angel Di Maria, would the world's best snub United for the lights of London or other European capitals?

There are fundamental issues that need to be addressed and while the inexorable commercial success only shows what canny a investment the Glazer Family made they should also be aware that the success of the business is driven by the long term achievements of the club. I don't believe United will dissipate and fail to challenge in future, but I do worry that bad decisions and failure to acknowledge and address them is undermining the club's footballing future.

Van Gaal's tenure as manager at times was amusing, but is ultimately flawed. United will not only need a new manager come next season, but a reflection of what it wants to be.

Manchester United: A hole in the middle

If Manchester United goes on to win this year’s Premier League title and beat their local rivals, Manchester City, then fans and players will undoubtedly unite in what has become one of the closest title finishes in recent years. Not only will United fans be happy vanquishing their wealthy and ‘noisy’ neighbours but it will make United the only English side to have won twenty league championships, two clear of their fiercest rivals Liverpool.

Yet amidst the potential celebrations, which by no means are likely, there appears to be a degree of gloom and uncertainty about the future. Anyone looking at the league table may be nonplussed by such assertions. So far this season after 36 league games, United have won 26, scored 86 goals and amassed 83 points. In last year’s championship winning side the team won 23 games, scoring 78 goals and topping the table with 80 points. This is a side that has played the majority of the season without some of their key players; Captain Nemanja Vidic ruptured his cruciate ligament in December, whilst midfielder Darren Fletcher has been fighting to save his career following a chronic bowel condition. The team also had the difficulty in replacing the Dutch goalkeeper Edwin van der Sar, who retired after six seasons with the club.

Yet, after the immense disappointment of losing to Barcelona in last season’s Champions League final, the result and manner of the victory against Man City in August’s Community Shield brought a deal of hope and excitement. Besides new goalkeeper David de Gea’s mistake against Edin Dzeko, United’s passing and desire was impressive. A midfield with a large Paul Scholes shaped gap was fluent and confident. New, young and dynamic players were making United quicker, on and off the ball. After coming back from two goals down at halftime to win 3-2, it showed a more determined and technical United.

The start of the Premier League season saw no relent either. Less than a year after he announced that he wanted to leave the club, Wayne Rooney was scoring freely and the team was trouncing sides with ease. Arsenal, Bolton and Tottenham all took healthy beatings. The loss of midfielder Tom Cleverley to injury was a blow, but the return of long term absentee Antonio Valencia reminded the fans of the depth in the squad. Even the league’s joint top scorer from last season, Dimitar Bebatov, struggled to get a game. By October, United and City’s free scoring dominance saw them canter away from all other potential title rivals.

United's record in the Premier League.

The embarrassing 6-1 defeat at home to rivals City was a black day. No doubt the score was flattering; people forget that Jonny Evans had been sent off early in the second half when City had a 2-0 advantage, but it was no excuse. It highlighted obvious weaknesses in midfield compared to City’s talent. Fletcher was not in good health and Anderson had a particularly poor game, but it opened the questions of why Sir Alex had not brought in a classy central midfielder in the summer. Besides Carrick’s excellent and unsung performances this season, the fact is that no quality central midfielder has been brought in since Roy Keane left the club in 2005. The return of Paul Scholes in January asked more questions than it solved of the previous ones.

The performances in Europe were just as shocking. Last year, United were strong defensively and didn’t lose a game home or away. The Romanian side Otelul Galati were utterly  hopeless, but the slip ups against Benfica and Basle were impermissible. Confusing performances and needless mistakes became far too common, particularly at home. In the Europa League, they only just beat Ajax over two ties, whereas Athletic Bilbao gave them a footballing lesson. What I found most remarkable about the Bilbao game was not the match, but the reaction by Bilbao fans to the substitutions of Scholes and Giggs. The San Mames erupted into applause when the two left the field. It not only highlighted the fans recognition and appreciation, but it enhanced the idea that United needed severe investment. Fans only had to look at Bilbao’s central midfield three to recognise the difference.

A good beating in the Basque country.

Defeats, at different points, to Blackburn at home in the league, Crystal Palace in the League Cup and Liverpool in the FA Cup confirmed that United lacked a battling and technical quality in the middle of the pitch. Paul Scholes’s performances have been immense, but he is just a sticking plaster. It became more apparent in the second half of the season when De Gea, Evans and Ferdinand formed a solid defensive partnership and Rooney, Valencia and Welbeck continued to create and score goals upfront. United can score and stop goals, but it doesn’t necessary mean they can control games, particularly when other teams get their tactics right. I think particularly of the occasion when Newcastle beat them 3-0 at the Sports Direct Arena.

The trouble as Roy Keane notoriously, and rightly, made when he left the club was that at great clubs such as United, there should be no such thing as a ‘transitional’ period. Yes, players leave and retire, but young players should be part of the competition, not on work experience. If you can’t learn and adapt, then you’re simply not good enough.

Sir Alex has complained in recent years about the value for money in the market. He decided that Karim Benzema simply wasn’t worth £35 million and Wesley Sneijder’s wage demands were too high. Yet at the same time, the highly regarded Ravel Morrison was allowed to leave (though this may be down to his attitude) and the academy’s biggest prospect future, Paul Pogba, remains unclear. Certainly, scouting has become much better and there is new wealth in the game e.g. PSG, City and Malaga but whilst United have continued to improve through development and recruitment, it makes it more bizarre why the money hasn’t gone into the centre of midfield. United are constantly linked with the likes of Edin Hazard, Christian Eriksen, Javi Martinez and Luka Modric but what is the likelihood of any these players moving to Old Trafford. There are financial constraints on the club through the Glazers’s debt, which is unforgivable, but also the fact that Fergie is unwilling to spend top dollar for the so-called finish article or certainly what the selling club believes them to be worth. This is by no means a criticism of Sir Alex, as he has been the single biggest force behind the club this season but it may come to haunt United if the title does end up at the Etihad.

United may not win any trophies this season and some critics may say deservedly so. Yet be assured that if they do take their thirteenth title, it will all be down to Fergie. Out of the players, Rooney has scored the goals, but he has not been as consistent as Carrick, Scholes and Valencia. Jonny Evans deserves recognition for an outstanding season. One can only hope as a United fan that if it does become lucky 13 then we will see some new arrivals in the centre in the summer.

There's more than one Carlos Tevez!

It is quite interesting to see that the Carlos Tevez affair is still ongoing and will continue to boil over until the Argentinean’s exit from Manchester City is finalised. Tevez, who allegedly refused to come on as a substitute in last week’s Champions League tie against Bayern Munich received much criticism for his actions from journalists, managers and ex-professionals. Anyone who has followed the career of the striker will be aware of his peripatetic drifting across the English Premier League from West Ham, where his goals saved them from relegation; to Manchester United , where he won trophies at home and abroad and finally Man City, where he earns an estimated £250,000 a week.

Many commentators have pointed to the analysis of former Scotland and Liverpool player Graeme Souness and now Sky pundit for his remarks. Souness said: (You can see them here)

“Why would a player not want to go on and help his teammates? How selfish can you get? Because you didn't start: how petulant can you be?


“You chase him as far as you can from Manchester tomorrow, because he is one bad apple and that can spread. He's a disgrace to football. Your man on the street thinks there's a lot wrong with modern footballers. He epitomises what that man thinks."

I think the most interesting turn of phrase that Souness uses is ‘man on the street’. The ‘man on the street’ is what we perceive as the same social and economic background where most players came from, what we may deem as working class – the same grouping as the majority of fans. Yet football has moved on in so many different ways. The abolition of the wage cap in 1961 allowed footballers to earn much more money than previously, the revenue generated by television and consequentially global marketing made clubs and ultimately players wealthier. Perhaps most significantly, the landmark Bosman ruling allowed players to leave clubs at the end of their contracts giving them greater power over pay and contracts.

Modern day footballers are perceived as mercenaries that are inherently disloyal to fans. Yet, who’s not to say that players such as Bobby Moore or Stanley Matthews wouldn’t have done the same in their time, it’s just the framework was different back then. In the real world, people leave jobs all the time for better pay (granted not on the same scale) but no one calls them disloyal.

I can’t condone what Tevez did but nevertheless I don’t think we should have been as surprised by it all.

Football: Money = Success? I debt it?

Listening to a debate this morning about football, what is it that ultimately motivates owners of football clubs to pump money into clubs? The argument has arisen after the recent departure of Martin O’Neill from Aston Villa and the supposed demands he made to owner Randy Lerner. Previously, Villa were an inconsistent mid-ranked team, but under O’Neill’s management with Lerner’s investment, they have become one of a handful of clubs pushing for a place in the Champions League. The issue for Villa and for many teams in this region is that by consistently finish in third or fourth spot, it requires the necessary investment: 50 million to 100 million pounds, something Lerner, we understand, was not willing to do.

What is an owner to do because the financial model would not make sense in any other business sector that they have worked in. Football teams nowadays are judged by silverware and their competitiveness to sign 'top' talent. In business, research and probing investment is fastidiously raked over to ensure a healthy return on investment over a long term plan, in football spending £25 million on a striker may not lead to instant success. Lerner is generous with his wealth and O’Neill spent millions on a large squad with a large wage bill, so why can’t he be happy with what he has? Let’s us not forget the competitors around them, Manchester City have an Arab billionaire, Tottenham will line their pockets in the Champions League this year and then we can’t forget the likes of Liverpool and Everton who always need to be watched. It’s a marketplace like no other.

Then there are the shareholders: the fans. Traditionally, a good cup-run and a higher than expected league finish would suffice.However, now there is an increasing desire to attract the top stars and their wages, this continuous investment can literally produce no palpable returns. The problem with many British clubs is that recruitment is purely done through the manager. The European model of ‘Directors of Football’, who oversee the talent search, are seen as undermining and meddling. It does sound like an alpha-male syndrome; but when the tenure of football manager on average is just over the year, it is daft to spend so much on players and staff when inevitably it tends to go wrong. There are so many precedents from recent years that show that demanding fans or managers does not necessarily lead to long term glory: Leeds and Portsmouth spring to mind.

No one would question the interests of Lerner and to add to that Bill Kenwright, but the increasing percentage of ‘owners’ (We never called them that 10 years ago) and the business of football makes that next step up impossible to call. I personally argue that green and gold protests at Old Trafford are very romantic; but would Man United fans’ accept the prospects of barren years and austerity? Quick answer yes, but when they think about it, probably no. Today, success is built on a mountain of debt or sugar daddy wealth.

The one hope we have is that football is potentially becoming more accountable, particularly to its fans and society. UEFA’s decision to tighten fiscal imprudence is a necessary step to quell the unharnessed spending of current times (as long as it is implemented sensibly). Success is the desire of all football clubs, yet amassing billions of pounds of debt is fruitless and reckless. How all owners would love a manager like Arsene Wenger. Wenger invented the term ‘financial doping’, he knows that short term interests serve no purpose in running a football club and though many draw to Arsenal’s naked trophy cabinet over the past few seasons, Arsenal fans know from other supporters and from their own experience that despite football being a billionaires’ playground, success is something to be built on, spraying cash at it doesn’t mean anything.