Who are these players that can offer that for 40m?
Erik ten Hag - Manchester United manager
- Thread starter sewey89
- 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.
Who are these players that can offer that for 40m?
A good reminder of why you shouldn’t believe everything you read as this isn’t even remotely true.
He claims we could have signed him a year earlier, ignoring the fact that if we did that Hannibal would have only been 15, making it illegal and earning us a transfer ban.
We didn’t follow up on it? More nonsense, it was widely reported we had a bid rejected in January right after he turned 16, as soon as we could possibly move for him legally.
Available for free? Again not true. Hannibal tried to take Monaco to court to have his contract nullified but they lost the case and he wasn’t allowed to leave for free.
New contract announced until 2026.
New contract is done
Announcement of Ruuuuuuuuuuuuudddddd coming soon enough then 
Am I right in saying that his contract ran until next year but that there was the usual +1 option we seem to like.
So this is essentially the additional year being triggered as the terms are being reported as being the same.
So this is essentially the additional year being triggered as the terms are being reported as being the same.
So this coming season and season after, not that long an extension. One of those is the option on the previous contract isn't it really. Actually what @GlasgowRedz said.
1 year extension? Thats maybe a good compromise but it potentially leaves the door open to speculation again. Two years might have been more advisable. Still, at least it's done and we can push on now hopefully on the playing staff side.
Is this really a new contract or just the plus one being activated? Either something was changed which required a new contract or the plus one could only be activated if both parties agreed i.e the club couldn't automatically activate it?
It clearly says ... signs new Contract.
It clearly says ... signs new Contract.
It will be new just in the terms of the contract, not really in length. All we have done is let him have the last year of his current one and triggered the one year option.
New contract with our terms I guess. Fine for me
No its a new contract for 2 years.
It says extends actually if you read the article, doesn't mean its new at all. I think its just the plus one has been activated.
Where does it say its new....
We’ve essentially just triggered the 12 month extension, I thought he would sign a longer term deal but it is what it is
So basically what he would have had if we just let him continue with final year of current contract and then triggered the extra year at the end of it. It will be the terms of the contract that will be different.
So a new Contract then.
It is actually being reported on Sky as a contract extension. Two years is sensible. If this were going back a year. It would be a five year contract with a years option.
Is that really his signature?
The terms of the contract are the same as per the Athletic article.
They've essentially triggered his extension and said it's a new deal. A bit bizarre.
No where in Utd's statement does it say its a new deal....
This is just his same contract with the one year option being triggered, which I should imagine required both parties to agree on to happen, hence the discussions.
New contract then.
Happy for United and Erik
Some people will be absolutely fuming at Ashworth's quotes 
Check the headline
What am I missing....
****
Anyway, this feels like a big win for EtH. Ineos have come across somewhat weak in managing this.
I hope with a hierarchy above him that is benefitting of a team that wins major honours and is very much modern, that he can just focus on being first team head coach.
The transfer window will be integral for him and we seem to already be making some interesting moves.
The transfer window will be integral for him and we seem to already be making some interesting moves.
Why do you say that?
Could have sworn the initial articles from the Athletic said that he had signed a new contract on existing terms, the article now states he's extended his deal by the club triggering the 1 year option.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter. It's the right call firming up the second year.
We were told he was 100% sacked before the FA cup win. Before and/or after INEOS touted other managers, and if reports are true, one or two declined. They then decided to keep EtH, who has just had his contract extended on the same terms he was promised when he left Ajax. I can't help but feel Ineos dug themselves into a hole with this one which gave EtH the leverage to get the extension he wanted (which I do think was his terms for staying from how it was reported when it was announced, but I guess perhaps Ineos had to because of the speculation). We all imagined it would be a new contract with terms more favourable to Ineos which it obviously isn't.
Last edited:
That all sounds completely straight forward. Hire me instead, I‘m a lot cheaper.
This whole Eredivisie trope of yours: surely you realize it is making you look silly?
I guess we should not have signed Van Nistelrooij, Jaap Stam, Van Persie. Big mistakes those.
This transfer window is especially critical for him now, as he essentially has just one year to convince the new football management before getting into his final year.
I hope he gets the ins and out he needs, and then is able to put out consistent performances. So many times we put together a very good half or half an hour and then things came crashing for one reason or another. Also I don't want to see Bruno or anyone being undroppable after consistent trash performances.
I hope he gets the ins and out he needs, and then is able to put out consistent performances. So many times we put together a very good half or half an hour and then things came crashing for one reason or another. Also I don't want to see Bruno or anyone being undroppable after consistent trash performances.
What Bruno trash performances? He has been consistent. He can use a backup for rotation, but he is no 1 on the teamsheet.
They also keeps saying there's no reliable links to Ugarte, even though it's been reported by the Athletic, who are apparently reliable enough to believe the links to the other 3 players they've mentioned.
He was absolutely diabolical for months last season, I would say from November all the way to the beginning of March, EtH would have been well within his rights to drop him on merit.
That has nothing to do with what I’m saying whatsoever but okay
Absolutely not, he was not the problem. You don‘t take out the player who always fights and makes stuff happen. Especially not when the team is in trouble.