The bit where he said "I want Giggsy on the wing," and someone replied "You're Giggsy, boss."
The anti-Giggs sentiment
- Thread starter redspoony
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
The bit where he said "I want Giggsy on the wing," and someone replied "You're Giggsy, boss."
Why not give the kit mans son a go at the top job? both have similar CV's for the position at this stage.
I know there's not much to go on but he just doesn't come across as passionate and brimming with ideas about how we'll win the match, compared to what i imagine say a Guardiola team talk would be like.
I can't see any difference between Giggs and P.Neville, Neville was sacked with Moyes so why should Giggs not get the same treatment?
Some people act like he shagged their wife. It's crazy. The funny thing is a lot of them would have allowed it when he was a player 
The fact is I'm sure we know what we're doing. I think if we wanted Jose he'd be in the bag.
The fact is I'm sure we know what we're doing. I think if we wanted Jose he'd be in the bag.It's just ludicrous to consider promoting a coach who has worked under a disastrous Moyes regime, and as an assistant manager during this arguably worse failure under LvG. Take away the name Ryan Giggs and all you have left is the coaching CV that is just not good. To hand the reigns to Ryan Giggs would be an amazing risk to say the least, a risk I'm not willing to take at this point.
I've gotten past my disgust and disappointment for his personal choices, football people should not be held up as morality role models.
And so that aside, I'm somebody who likes the idea of Giggs managing Manchester United as soon as he is ready and as soon as possible. I thought it was an excellent plan for him to learn on the job with a very experienced manager and eventually succeed him.
The problem is the plan only really worked if Giggs had contributed to some success and the departing manager left behind a stable platform for him to build from.
With both Moyes and LVG having been abject failures, the club under global microscopic analysis and without a clear identity the current situation is as difficult as it could be for him to take over and succeed. He needed to enter the role under with some confidence and success. So appointing him is almost setting him up to fail.
The flip side is that we have tried the 'experienced old pro' route twice now since SAF and it hasn't worked. Of course we could have appointed better experienced pros's but the point remains.
And for me that's the crucial dilemma here. How can we know we are going to fare better under Mourinho (in the worst form of his life and not aligned to some core club values) or Guardiola (new to EPL and only proven at managing Rolls Royce squads) than Giggs who knows the club and English football inside out.
For me, appointing him now is not as mad or bad as some are making out. It's as risky as appointing Jose/Pep.
And so that aside, I'm somebody who likes the idea of Giggs managing Manchester United as soon as he is ready and as soon as possible. I thought it was an excellent plan for him to learn on the job with a very experienced manager and eventually succeed him.
The problem is the plan only really worked if Giggs had contributed to some success and the departing manager left behind a stable platform for him to build from.
With both Moyes and LVG having been abject failures, the club under global microscopic analysis and without a clear identity the current situation is as difficult as it could be for him to take over and succeed. He needed to enter the role under with some confidence and success. So appointing him is almost setting him up to fail.
The flip side is that we have tried the 'experienced old pro' route twice now since SAF and it hasn't worked. Of course we could have appointed better experienced pros's but the point remains.
And for me that's the crucial dilemma here. How can we know we are going to fare better under Mourinho (in the worst form of his life and not aligned to some core club values) or Guardiola (new to EPL and only proven at managing Rolls Royce squads) than Giggs who knows the club and English football inside out.
For me, appointing him now is not as mad or bad as some are making out. It's as risky as appointing Jose/Pep.
...
I've gotten past my disgust and disappointment for his personal choices, football people should not be held up as morality role models.
And so that aside, I'm somebody who likes the idea of Giggs managing Manchester United as soon as he is ready and as soon as possible. I thought it was an excellent plan for him to learn on the job with a very experienced manager and eventually succeed him.
The problem is the plan only really worked if Giggs had contributed to some success and the departing manager left behind a stable platform for him to build from.
With both Moyes and LVG having been abject failures, the club under global microscopic analysis and without a clear identity the current situation is as difficult as it could be for him to take over and succeed. He needed to enter the role under with some confidence. So appointing him is almost setting him up to fail.
The flip side is that we have tried the 'experienced pro' route twice now since SAF and it hasn't worked. Of course we could have appointed better experienced pros's but the point remains.
And for me that's the crucial dilemma here: How can we know we are going to fare better under Mourinho (in the worst form of his life and not aligned to some core club values) or Guardiola (new to EPL and only proven at managing Rolls Royce squads) than Giggs who knows the club and English football inside out.
For me, appointing Giggs now is not as mad or bad as some are making out. It's as risky as appointing Jose/Pep.
And so that aside, I'm somebody who likes the idea of Giggs managing Manchester United as soon as he is ready and as soon as possible. I thought it was an excellent plan for him to learn on the job with a very experienced manager and eventually succeed him.
The problem is the plan only really worked if Giggs had contributed to some success and the departing manager left behind a stable platform for him to build from.
With both Moyes and LVG having been abject failures, the club under global microscopic analysis and without a clear identity the current situation is as difficult as it could be for him to take over and succeed. He needed to enter the role under with some confidence. So appointing him is almost setting him up to fail.
The flip side is that we have tried the 'experienced pro' route twice now since SAF and it hasn't worked. Of course we could have appointed better experienced pros's but the point remains.
And for me that's the crucial dilemma here: How can we know we are going to fare better under Mourinho (in the worst form of his life and not aligned to some core club values) or Guardiola (new to EPL and only proven at managing Rolls Royce squads) than Giggs who knows the club and English football inside out.
For me, appointing Giggs now is not as mad or bad as some are making out. It's as risky as appointing Jose/Pep.
What did Moyes change exactly? He changed some of the coaching staff which is perfectly understandable considering that he's the new manager. Having said that apart from 3-4 people from his former club all the coaches he hired were former United players, who are supposed to know the club and the 'way' inside out. In terms of players he added 2, Fellaini and Mata. The only way we could have had less changes was to keep SAF as manager.
The reality is that United had been in decline for a long long time ie before SAF retired. Players left (Ronaldo, Tevez), others were growing old (Giggs, Scholes, Vidic, Rio, Evra) and yet the club refused to bring the top quality players needed to replace like with like. In few words you cant replace the likes of Giggs, Scholes, Ronaldo, Rio and co with Valencia, Young, Cleverley, Jones and Ando and expect to keep being on top.
LVG was wise enough to bring the much needed change at United however his lack of man management and his inability to understand the EPL ruined him. We need someone who is less extreme but still has the experience and the know how to make the changes this club needs to stir the ship to the right direction. Giggs is not the man. You don't give a man's job to a boy with no managerial experience whatsoever
He's never managed a football team before. Why would we appoint him when we can appoint a vastly more experienced manager?
LVG is an experienced pro but whose the other one? Seriously you cant really judge someone who had never won anything in his career as experienced
Err? Common sense?
Joey Barton and Robbie Savage know the English football inside out. Wanna appoint them as well?
For me it's about what happens if he doesn't get immediate results. Imagine if we sack Van Gaal and Giggs takes over for January. What if our form stays similar and we don't make top four, finish midtable, and struggle to score goals. Do we stay with Giggs? Do we sack a club legend? How long does he get to turn things around? How long can we afford to give him or anybody?
Right now we need an immediate uptick and I don't know if Giggs can provide that and sustain it. He has been part of the coaching staff for our worst period in recent memory.
Right now we need an immediate uptick and I don't know if Giggs can provide that and sustain it. He has been part of the coaching staff for our worst period in recent memory.
Some people act like he shagged their wife. It's crazy. The funny thing is a lot of them would have allowed it when he was a player
I've never seen a greater congregation of holier than thous in one place on the internet. As a player Giggs remained loyal to the club for his entire career and to question his loyalty, as some have done, because of off field behaviour is nonsense.
For all we know Mourinho likes donkey sex and Pep robs cardigans off other mens washing lines and sticks his knob in them. (That would be a problem as it's illegal actually but you know what I mean)
All that matters is that the man who takes over is capable. If we're examining people's sexual history for reasons not to hire them we could be looking a long time for Mr Clean.
My main point of contention against Giggs is that whenever I have seen him interviewed he appears to have the personality of a cardboard cut-out
We don't know how good he is tactically so I will reserve judgement - but I have to say we hardly did a great deal different in his brief spell in charge after Moyes which makes me wonder how many ideas he actually has
We don't know how good he is tactically so I will reserve judgement - but I have to say we hardly did a great deal different in his brief spell in charge after Moyes which makes me wonder how many ideas he actually has
Fergie left, so we tried to fill his shoes like-for-like with Moyes. We failed.
Then we went the exact opposite way with a manager who was completely different in LvG. We failed.
Next, people want to go with somebody who's a happy medium between the two: modern, successful and PL proven in Mourinho. Will we fail again? I think we will, because he's far too different from what's come before and he doesn't have the benefit of a preseason/summer transfer window. Asking the team to go from tiki taka to counterattacking, with wingers who track back and cbs who play a deep line is too much of a change. He's the obvious choice in terms of the direction we should go, but that doesn't make him the right choice to pick up the baton right now. Giggs knows what makes the team tick and he'll know what to keep and what to discard. Evolution not revolution.
Then we went the exact opposite way with a manager who was completely different in LvG. We failed.
Next, people want to go with somebody who's a happy medium between the two: modern, successful and PL proven in Mourinho. Will we fail again? I think we will, because he's far too different from what's come before and he doesn't have the benefit of a preseason/summer transfer window. Asking the team to go from tiki taka to counterattacking, with wingers who track back and cbs who play a deep line is too much of a change. He's the obvious choice in terms of the direction we should go, but that doesn't make him the right choice to pick up the baton right now. Giggs knows what makes the team tick and he'll know what to keep and what to discard. Evolution not revolution.
This
In addition, my concern is for what Giggs is currently bringing to the team.
One might say that he had been born an bred in the Fergie image ie quick attacking football with a huge emphasis on the wings. If this is the case then my concerns are thus.
If LvG is saying that Giggs has an input in the tactics of United, does he emphasise what he believes in as a United man or just sucking up to LvG. This IMO makes me to question if Giggs is really convinced of His beliefs and if he is mentally strong to lead from the front.
If Giggs is this "United " man does this mean that he would have to rip up LvG's foundation of 3 years or build upon it. How can Giggs make the best of both worlds work considering that one half is yet to be successful and the other half is very inexperienced?
My opinions
It's not anti-Giggs per se, it's more pro-United since we support the club, not individuals - no matter how storied they are. He doesn't have the credentials in terms of experience, or a track record of success for the job; and for some romantic reason - we've made a horrendous decision to 'groom' him on the fly - this at one of the top clubs in the world. The manager needs to install his own men without accommodating trainees at the behest of the higher ups (as is usually the case at other clubs - even Rijkaard didn't groom Pep; but the clowns in Madrid are grooming Zidane for sure), and tell you what - if say I'm the next manager, I don't want him anywhere near my staff because I don't want the manager-in-waiting breathing down my neck.
There are a fair few pro-Giggs arguments:
1. He was a legend - Has no bearing on his managerial credentials.
2. He knows the club inside out - Again, no bearing on managerial credentials, he might know more about the club than the average mug - but that doesn't lend itself to a managerial role.
3. He trained under Fergie - So did about a couple dozen current/ former managers - and look where they are.
4. He will learn from Moyes and Van Gaal's mistakes - What if he learns to repeat the same mistakes?
5. Guardiola - Seedorf, Inzaghi, Souness, Shearer, Gullit, etc.
6. He will stay for 20 years - No, he will stay is he's successful. Let's not put the cart before the horse.
Cons:
1. He has never managed a club before (4 inconsequential matches does not a manager make since our season was already over by all acounts - and he was under zero pressure).
2. He does not know how to manage in European competitions (big criteria for a club like United which should ideally have European ambitions).
3. He does not know how to manage the club when we're pushing for titles (and no, experience as a player doesn't count - Keegan had experience as a player, but he crumbled under pressure from Fergie).
4. He has lived in a sheltered environment with no experience outside United - that will hamper his development, the best managers are usually well traveled and it gives them exposure to newer things in newer environments.
5. We don't know how good of a tactician he is - can he outwit the likes of Simeone, Ancelotti, Pep in the big, big matches? Simply hollering - 'Wazza! tuck in' won't do.
6. The club is at a critical juncture - and he would represent a massive risk because there's no adequate sample size - and failure could set us back by a couple of seasons, and cost the club a hundred million if not more in terms of revenue - look what Moyes' tenure did. That money could be better spent elsewhere - like improving the squad...
7. Can he dissociate himself from cliques and loyalty attachments, and become a 'manager' rather than a buddy to some of the players? Seems pretty straightforward, but it's an incredibly hard thing to do for a beginner.
8. How will he react in the face of adversity as a manager? We have nothing to go by.
9. What if he fails? This is actually a pro-Giggs point. No other big club will take a flyer on him, and failing at United might shatter him. What if the divorce isn't by mutual consent, but acrimonious in nature? Wouldn't we be complicit in setting him up for failure by throwing him in the deep end when he's not ready?
etc.
If he becomes the next manager, that's ok too. Maybe he'll be a superlative manager, who knows? But it would be a very risky and unnecessary gamble that could blow up in our faces, and scar a legend of the club (probably for life - very few managers make a comeback after massive failure at a top club after their first job). He needs to do what Gary Neville did. Go out, manage another club, if you're good at your job - apply for the manager's position at United (if it's vacant).
People say he will never prove anything by managing mid-table clubs, but it could not be further from he truth. He could prove loads by getting them to overperform, maybe take them from midtable to Top 6 and qualify for Europe; then manage a slightly bigger club (if not in England, then maybe Spain, the Bundesliga or Serie A) - show genuine title ambitions, maybe win a Cup or two. And then he might be ready by merit. And he'd have done it the hard way so he'll value the experience - instead of being handed the position on a silver platter.
PS: And for the 1000000th time Guardiola was a once in a decade or two type of anomaly - not the rule of thumb. And he traveled to Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Brazil to prepare himself tactically - under Bielsa and the likes. Apart from learning from Sacchi's Milan, from Cruyff when he was a young player, from Van Gaal when he was successful etc etc. And that preparation is evident in the way he trains his teams - he's brilliant, crazy and exhaustive - which is why he can't manage for more than 3-4 years at a stretch and might burn himself out, or lose passion for the game. Pep is very very unique.
There are a fair few pro-Giggs arguments:
1. He was a legend - Has no bearing on his managerial credentials.
2. He knows the club inside out - Again, no bearing on managerial credentials, he might know more about the club than the average mug - but that doesn't lend itself to a managerial role.
3. He trained under Fergie - So did about a couple dozen current/ former managers - and look where they are.
4. He will learn from Moyes and Van Gaal's mistakes - What if he learns to repeat the same mistakes?
5. Guardiola - Seedorf, Inzaghi, Souness, Shearer, Gullit, etc.
6. He will stay for 20 years - No, he will stay is he's successful. Let's not put the cart before the horse.
Cons:
1. He has never managed a club before (4 inconsequential matches does not a manager make since our season was already over by all acounts - and he was under zero pressure).
2. He does not know how to manage in European competitions (big criteria for a club like United which should ideally have European ambitions).
3. He does not know how to manage the club when we're pushing for titles (and no, experience as a player doesn't count - Keegan had experience as a player, but he crumbled under pressure from Fergie).
4. He has lived in a sheltered environment with no experience outside United - that will hamper his development, the best managers are usually well traveled and it gives them exposure to newer things in newer environments.
5. We don't know how good of a tactician he is - can he outwit the likes of Simeone, Ancelotti, Pep in the big, big matches? Simply hollering - 'Wazza! tuck in' won't do.
6. The club is at a critical juncture - and he would represent a massive risk because there's no adequate sample size - and failure could set us back by a couple of seasons, and cost the club a hundred million if not more in terms of revenue - look what Moyes' tenure did. That money could be better spent elsewhere - like improving the squad...
7. Can he dissociate himself from cliques and loyalty attachments, and become a 'manager' rather than a buddy to some of the players? Seems pretty straightforward, but it's an incredibly hard thing to do for a beginner.
8. How will he react in the face of adversity as a manager? We have nothing to go by.
9. What if he fails? This is actually a pro-Giggs point. No other big club will take a flyer on him, and failing at United might shatter him. What if the divorce isn't by mutual consent, but acrimonious in nature? Wouldn't we be complicit in setting him up for failure by throwing him in the deep end when he's not ready?
etc.
If he becomes the next manager, that's ok too. Maybe he'll be a superlative manager, who knows? But it would be a very risky and unnecessary gamble that could blow up in our faces, and scar a legend of the club (probably for life - very few managers make a comeback after massive failure at a top club after their first job). He needs to do what Gary Neville did. Go out, manage another club, if you're good at your job - apply for the manager's position at United (if it's vacant).
People say he will never prove anything by managing mid-table clubs, but it could not be further from he truth. He could prove loads by getting them to overperform, maybe take them from midtable to Top 6 and qualify for Europe; then manage a slightly bigger club (if not in England, then maybe Spain, the Bundesliga or Serie A) - show genuine title ambitions, maybe win a Cup or two. And then he might be ready by merit. And he'd have done it the hard way so he'll value the experience - instead of being handed the position on a silver platter.
PS: And for the 1000000th time Guardiola was a once in a decade or two type of anomaly - not the rule of thumb. And he traveled to Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Brazil to prepare himself tactically - under Bielsa and the likes. Apart from learning from Sacchi's Milan, from Cruyff when he was a young player, from Van Gaal when he was successful etc etc. And that preparation is evident in the way he trains his teams - he's brilliant, crazy and exhaustive - which is why he can't manage for more than 3-4 years at a stretch and might burn himself out, or lose passion for the game. Pep is very very unique.
That can be said for any manager out there, regardless of who he is. Either he has not managed in England or has been a bit crap recently.
Difference is those two are highly decorated and successful managers, while the other one it not even a manager or has ever been...
Huge factor - the media. It is easy to handle them as a player - and he only had 4 matches as an interim in which the media was not very critical. As seen with the media when van Gaal was concerned it is not easy to handle...
In that case though there's Hughes, Bruce, Keane, Solskjaer all who have knowledge of the club, English football and at least some managerial experience. What makes Giggs a better option than them? We can only hope that internally we've seen some exceptional managerial qualities in Giggs that are yet to be seen.
Its probably a response to the possibility he might manage us at some point after two prior poor managerial appointments. Tends to generate a lot of negativity.
Well, he is a usurper for starters.
and I think he eats babies for breakfast.
and I think he eats babies for breakfast.
The bits they showed in that we're clearly for a TV audience. Laughable to base a real opinion on that
But you are not the only one. Rossi hasn't shut up about it since they day he saw it
Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Giggs' decisions have kept LvG afloat this long.
Some people act like he shagged their wife. It's crazy. The funny thing is a lot of them would have allowed it when he was a player
I'm not sure we do, judging by how the past two years have been.
You are totally wrong and I will explain why.
First and foremost you are the same person, have the same character and share the same moral compass either you're private or in your profession. Otherwise you're close to be a psychopath. You can be a ruthless CEO and at the same time a wonderful father and husband but you're still the same person with the same character. Just different environments with different challenges.
There is One thing to do bad things in the heat of the moment then to do bad things for along time with the knowledge that you can destroy another persons personal life. Shagging your brothers wife for eight years is as bad as it gets. Next step is to feck your sons girlfriend for a couple of times.
Ask yourself what type of character you want as a boss, father in law or have a close relationship with.
I don't know Mr Giggs. But one thing I know is that a man who deliberately destroy his brothers marriage is a character I don't want near myself, my business or as a friend. I'm not an angel, probably the opposite but somewhere in life we all need to draw a line.
No disrespect but there are sexual history and sexual history.
Being anti-Giggs is the smart thing to do which is why everyone is jumping on board.
he needs to earn his creds is what most are saying. Which is fair. prove yourself before appplying for this job.
Massive risk to appoint Giggs, as would be appointing anyone who wouldn't have the backing of the fans...
Thanks but, with all due respect, I disagree with your entire post. It seems to me that line you talk about that needs to be drawn is your, very own personal one.
The debate is about the capabilities of the next United manager and not how good he is at keeping his dick in his pants.
He's been the most vocal of the management staff during games, so he either contributes negatively, in which case he shouldn't be even considered to be interim manager or the players flat out ignore him, in which case he shouldn't be considered for interim manager.
Regardless of what Giggs personal life is, his name and next United manager should not be used in the same sentence.
A better idea would be putting an ad on craigslist. I'm sure United will get more qualified applications than Giggsy's...
Maybe putting an inexperienced manager at Barca, having the best squad and a core of players that is kept for several years can help that manager grow into the position, but United at this time and in this state, is a recipe for disaster..
The sentiment against Giggs is fear of the unknown in management terms.
Nothing personal.
Nothing personal.
if we give giggs the job, at least immediately after LVG goes without proving his worth anywhere else, we will basically become the next liverpool.
I agree he shouldn't be the next manager. I'm simply saying it's nowt to do with what he does in the sack.
One question for you.
Do you think Barack Obama, Angela Merkel or David Cameron would survive if they have done similar things as Giggs? Clinton was in for a personal hearing because of a blown job, and he lied. Why do you think..
MU is a public company and many investors, partners and sponsosors take moral view very serious. As a assistant manager your private life is private, as a manager of a club of our size your private life is part of your CV. If you don't understand or see this then I can't help you further. I leave it there. No disrespect.
Agree on both accounts. Besides what he did was not illegal, immoral - yes, but not illegal. I don't care if he's cnut of the highest order as long he's hugely successful.
The manager's position should be judged on results if his personality is not right for the club sooner or later results will sour as well..
I think that is totally irrelevant mate. Those are public figures that are elected by the people and Giggs is an employee of a private equity that is ran by shareholders.
Besides, Terry did even worse thing for the dressing room and last time I recall he's still Chelsea's captain and plays for them.
Not that I approve his behavior, but I think it's irrelevant to this discussion or his managerial credentials.
Last edited: