I agree with you, overall, and that's why i said i didn't want him to become the permanent manager. My question was directed to the people who use the league finishes as a way to paint Solskjaer's tenure as a success. Several among them have been laying into RR since the first day he set foot in Carrington, and they like to point out his "inability" to get a tune out of this squad and his lack of charisma. As opposed to Solskjaer, that is. My question is simple: If the improbable happens and we get top-four, will that -in their eyes - mean that RR did a better job than Solskjaer? I like RR, but i don't think that this would be the case, and i don't need the end of the season to draw my conclusions.
Anyway, i think it's a pointless discussion. Mourinho won the EL/EFL and finished 2nd on 81 points, but it was plain obvious that this was as high as he could get with us. In his infinite wisdom, he proclaimed this his greatest achievement. The sad truth is he spent as much as Pep but, at the start of their second season, Guardiola's City was already on a different level and we were just waiting for Jose to push the self-destruction button. Under Solskjaer, we may have had consecutive top-four finishes, but it was plain obvious that were very streaky and, unlike Klopp (whose first couple of seasons at Anfield were often used as proof that Solskjaer will come good eventually), never looked that we could gain that extra gear (or two) that's needed to challeng for the big prizes.
Feck it, i'll make it even simpler. We finished 6th in Solskjaer's half-season. If we finish 5th under RR, would that mean that Ralf did better?
