Tangy wrote:

Cheers weedude.

I'd hope that of the 10 questions, at least 5 of them were asked by the fed - so hoping they can garner some information from that.

I'd love to think this could be the start of a closer relationship between the club and online Arabs and that it will help.

As for the bits about the fans, I'm maybe more positive and think the answers are trying to praise the fans for sticking with the team although as you rightly say, every team from 5th in the premier league down is hugely dependant on the fan base and their financial contribution.

I'm not in the business of ramming information down people's throats - if some don't wish to read or believe it, then that is fine - if it gives others a wee bit of hope for the future or an awareness of the bigger picture, then that's also fine.

As for the quality of the answers, I feel they have tried to put across detail in certain questions and some they obviously can't. Overall they have put a lot of time and effort into a request from a guy off the street. I'm not a super fan - i just go when I can. So 👏👏👏 to the club for that.

If all goes well and there's some positive feedback I would maybe try to open up questions to folk on here - but that is months away.

It's a good piece of work, Tangy, and maybe indicates a more balanced approach may bring about more openness.

I happen to believe the club is more approachable than might be imagined, although I also am very uneasy about the situation we are in football wise, and worried about the financial side of the club's operation, given the wee snippets some fans who may have much more knowledge than me seem to hold.

In the same way we might expect the club to put clear detail on the table regarding money flow issues, it would be beneficial if the supporters who indicate alarm could supply what information they can physically provide for us all to view.

PatReilly wrote:

Tangy wrote:

Cheers weedude.

I'd hope that of the 10 questions, at least 5 of them were asked by the fed - so hoping they can garner some information from that.

I'd love to think this could be the start of a closer relationship between the club and online Arabs and that it will help.

As for the bits about the fans, I'm maybe more positive and think the answers are trying to praise the fans for sticking with the team although as you rightly say, every team from 5th in the premier league down is hugely dependant on the fan base and their financial contribution.

I'm not in the business of ramming information down people's throats - if some don't wish to read or believe it, then that is fine - if it gives others a wee bit of hope for the future or an awareness of the bigger picture, then that's also fine.

As for the quality of the answers, I feel they have tried to put across detail in certain questions and some they obviously can't. Overall they have put a lot of time and effort into a request from a guy off the street. I'm not a super fan - i just go when I can. So 👏👏👏 to the club for that.

If all goes well and there's some positive feedback I would maybe try to open up questions to folk on here - but that is months away.

It's a good piece of work, Tangy, and maybe indicates a more balanced approach may bring about more openness.

I happen to believe the club is more approachable than might be imagined, although I also am very uneasy about the situation we are in football wise, and worried about the financial side of the club's operation, given the wee snippets some fans who may have much more knowledge than me seem to hold.

In the same way we might expect the club to put clear detail on the table regarding money flow issues, it would be beneficial if the supporters who indicate alarm could supply what information they can physically provide for us all to view.

 
Pat there have been several instances over last 2 years where folk have posted stuff and lets face it a fair chunk of people say they're making it up, or they're troublemakers, it's sometimes just not worth the hassle to post it on somewhere like this.

PatReilly wrote:

annanarab wrote:

What I gleaned from Colin's answers was that Ray (and those before him) gets a budget and its up to them from then on to run the playing side of things presumably up to the point they (e.g. Jackie, Mixu) are sacked.

Given we've been in decline for around 3 years now  and that at least 2 of the managers (Ray and Jackie) were light on experience before they got here and Mixu was light on managerial success, should the Board not have had a Performance Management System in pace to regularly (ie weekly) review with the Manager the teams performance to make sure they are on the right lines and making progress towards the Boards targets. Clearly no such system was in place as we had far too many defeats which led to our relegation. It seem neglectful of the board to allow an under-performing manager and under-performing team to continue under-performing for lengthy periods without intervening to question methods, tactics and alternatives. If the Manager is doing well and achieving the football targets and entertaining the fans or even encouraging more fans to come and see the attractive football being played, the need for such meetings could be reduced to a monthly session. 

Since the 1st Falkirk game, Board should have been reviewing performance with Ray on a weekly basis as in that time we have had quite a few dreadful results and performances. It is no use waiting until the end of the season to find out whether Ray has succeeded or failed. He is not currently succeeding and the Board needs Ray to provide answers and alternatives and to make the necessary changes to get the team back on track for the promotion push. I remember Jackie saying " he stood by his principles and philosophies (???) and would{n't?} be changing his ways which is exactly the point he should have been sacked given we were propelling down the league.  We cant afford to have managers that put their own interests ahead of the team. If a manager is sacked it should never come as a surprise if performance has been reviewed regularly 

 

Annanarab, while I've agreed with a few of your tactical assertions recently, I doubt many managers would take a job in such a rigid situation where the business people are questioning your football knowledge. Some strong personalities might, but then they would probably want more insight to the money workings at a club in a reciprocal manner.

Most managers don't succeed in football, if clubs adopted such a model, there would be several sackings every other day, and clubs couldn't really afford to do that.

I don't think many managerial sackings come as surprises, we knew Jackie and Mixu were on their way out, if anything they were supported too well by the board and the surprise was they lasted so long.

(I've added in {n't?}  to a bit of your text, have I got that wrong?)
 

Thanks for the correction Pat

Performance Management is a feature of most walks of life today and it is often carried out between someone who may have little subject knowledge. You dont have to have detailed subject knowledge  to assess/review targets, outcomes and options for improvement.BTW there will be people on United's Board who have considerable experience in this area.

Perhaps one of the reasons for football management failure and the high rate of sackings is due to a lack of performance management. It needn't be confrontational and any good manager worth his salt should be ready able and willing to discuss/review his performance and that of his team. Any manager not willing to do so shouldn't be appointed in the 1st place.

The time when Performance Management is most needed is when things are not going well in order to prevent a decline from becoming more serious.

Got to love the amount of fans who believe everything is rosy and we're running a good business
We're hemorrhaging money and the 1million investment that was stated we needed in the last statement from the auditors has unsurprisingly not materialised.

But im sure Southern is working super hard with his magic wand

I've argued before that the traditional managerial model simply does not work (& ultimately costs a fortune) but clubs forever persist with it regardless. So annan's & Pat's posts are very interesting especially in light of The New Rangers' mutterings this morning. Gordon Smith is lauding the Hearts Director of Football example which then depends on finding the 'right' DoF which might well end up being just another snakepit.

Nevertheless if Performance Management became a principal role of a DoF I'd like to see one in the door at Tannadice. Apart from overall senior management experience the candidate would need specific knowledge of the workings of professional football & a thorough knowledge of its current scene and basically to have 'seen it all'. But like I said there's not too many Craig Leveins to the pound. I wonder if Ray could work with Craig Brown.

Canadian Arab wrote:

Southampton are an interesting example - they appointed Ralph Krueger, who had been the head coach of the Edmonton Oilers ice hockey team, as some kind of a director of football operations (but not quite the same thing as a DoF, I don't think), and now he's their Chairman. Excellent pedigree in sports management, motivation etc.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/mar/12/southampton-appoint-ralph-krueger-chairman

 
A lot of this ties in with the American franchise model. Core beliefs, staff retention at exec level and an overall playing philosophy. A lot of English premiership / championship teams are starting to take this approach.
Consistency means that you won't bring in a new manager and he wants to change half the playing staff as they don't fit his style.
There are a lot more boring drivers behind it that draw in real world business approaches, but ultimately it makes for a better team in the park.
Our downside is ST knows fuck all about business and even less about football

Arabnophobia wrote:

Arab_plumber wrote:

The party line bullshit......

 
And the predictable shoot down from the mad fan

 That a united mad forum fan or just mad? 

Thanks for posting the replies Tangy. 

Gave me something to read over. cant help but feel alot of these answers are previous copy and paste jobs, feels to me something is missing...

Season tickets are a big thing again, looking at replies. Well emphasised!

Interesting about player transfer fee break down. 

He says the roles and responsibilities are all on the official, we'll they aint. Southern was always questioned, he doesnt appear on the web site but hey ho. 

Colin doesnt know the difference between a tier and a tear although plenty of the support have shed a few tears the past two years...

Colin once sat at a meeting with the fed and claimed United had to pay £200k just to talk to Yogi at ICT.  This sums up the man for me. Paying to 'talk' to a manager. deary deary me, and this is a football clubs associate director.  

Anyway, thanks for posting these tangy. 

 

Tangy wrote:

Affshore wrote:

Tangy wrote:

As for how I got these questions put across - it's not really for this thread.....but I'll happily chat about it somewhere else 😃
 

 

 

Hi Mr Affshore- i find threads get easily derailed and the major purpose of this thread was to discuss the answers given.

Yes, i agree with that, cant fault you Mr T 
 

Tangy wrote:

Affshore wrote:

Tangy wrote:

 

Hi Mr Affshore- i find threads get easily derailed and the major purpose of this thread was to discuss the answers given.

Yes, i agree with that, cant fault you Mr T 
 

 

It's an affsire/Tangy love in - who'd have thought it 👍any time

End of the day mate, we all have the same love, just a different opinion on the love of our lives and thats a FACT 
 

Affshore

To answer a couple of questions in your Post 42.  David Southern is employed as the General Manager of the Football Club, by the Board of Directors who make all the key decisions as regards the running of the Football Club.  His job is merely to implement what the BoD want done. I'd suggest that is why he is not featured on the Website.  Whilst he will sit in on Board Meetings, he is NOT on the Board, therefore, I'm sure he will have little or no clout on major financial issues, but he will undoubtedly be left to get on with day to day stuff, eg contracts, liaising with the football authorities, Council, logistics, other team's etc.  His employment, is presumably coz the Chairman and/or the BoD neither have the nous or the time to do this task; or they think it is below them?  But it's a job that needs done and it's a job that would need a decent skill set to do.  It's ridiculous to try to equate whatever he is paid with whether we could get another player or not.

Colin Stewart is an Associate Director and whilst sitting in on the Board, he will not be making any major financial decisions either.

I'd have thought that re the Yogi situation (and he was one of the two Managers I'd have gone for post Sackie, Billy Davies being the other) he was contracted to ICT and they had just won the Scottish Cup.  The figure quoted would have been the compensation figure ICT were looking for if Yogi walked out on his contract.  Our Board obviously decided they could not afford that, so they could not speak to him.  The BoD chose Mixup, the rest is history.  Unfortunately, in backing their new Manager, the BoD probably paid that out in his choice of dud players that made no difference.  We got relegated and budgets got slashed and we are where we are!

Recruitment Recruitment Recruitment as I keep saying!!!  We've all backed the wrang horse in our lives.  I thought I was marrying the right girl on Marriage number one, but it turned out she was a Pschotic Charlatan.  I learned from my mistake and so far so good on Marriage number two, 17 years and counting!

I know it does not suit the angle some are coming at, but every decision is a sliding door that leads to a Y junction.  The decision will come good immediately.  Or it will come good in time (but whether you are allowed to or willing to give it the time is another matter).  Or the decision will not work out.  That my friend is life!!!

FKT x

It's not really the point of this thread, however, would you want united to pay 200k for yogi? I'm honestly not sure what you are trying to say? So feel free to elaborate

Tangy wrote:

It's not really the point of this thread, however, would you want united to pay 200k for yogi? I'm honestly not sure what you are trying to say? So feel free to elaborate

I doubt that Colin Stewart would have been involved in any negotiations for John Hughes, but it may be he was told ICT had said '£200,000 to just talk to us about our manager' in a chancing-their-arm-opening-gambit style. So he passed that on to supporters.

In answer to you Tangy, I would not have paid 200 pence to get Hughes to Tannadice. His 'success' at ICT is, as I'm sure others have pointed out on other threads, indicative of a well run club with a solid infrastructure, given their relative income from attendances.