Issac

🚨 Ashley Young on INEOS reportedly preferring Howe to Pochettino: “Someone said to me, ‘Pochettino might be able to go over Berrada and Wilcox’s heads.’ I said, ‘Good. Perhaps somebody will finally ask what they’re doing.’ That is where Manchester United have brought me. I’m supposed to be worried that the manager might have enough authority to challenge the people choosing his players. What exactly have those people achieved that makes their judgment untouchable? If these reports are accurate, INEOS wanted Howe, the owners preferred Pochettino, and now everybody will stand beside him holding a shirt. ‘He was always our first choice.’ Of course he was. You just needed somebody upstairs to explain it to you. I would choose Pochettino over Howe for this job. That doesn’t mean I’m suddenly convinced United are winning the league. But Tottenham, Paris Saint-Germain, Chelsea. USA. Different dressing rooms, different demands, enormous scrutiny. He has experience dealing with international stars and expectations that go beyond making a club respectable. At Tottenham, you could see the work. The pressing, the combinations, full-backs providing width, players arriving around the striker. There was a team developing an understanding. That is what I would want him to build at United. Then somebody says, ‘Eddie Howe would work well within the structure.’ Fine. Explain the football first. ‘He fits how we want to operate.’ Yes, but how do you want to play? ‘There would be a good working relationship.’ I’m sure there would. Would Manchester United be any bloody better? Howe has done good work. You don’t need to pretend otherwise to prefer somebody else. But if Wilcox and Berrada believe he is the stronger appointment, tell us why in football terms. Not in political terms. Tell us what he offers this squad that Pochettino doesn’t. Because if the attraction is that he would be easier for them to manage, they’re recruiting for their own comfort. The manager gets the cameras outside his house. The manager explains another defeat. The manager loses his job. Meanwhile, the people above him get another appointment to prove how clever they are. I can imagine the discussion. ‘We need somebody who will accept our decisions.’ Why? Are they good decisions? ‘We need everyone pulling in the same direction.’ Then give them a direction worth following. And this is why I would have wanted a serious conversation with Conte. He would ask uncomfortable questions before taking the job. ‘Who chooses the players?’ ‘What happens when we disagree?’ ‘You want me to compete for the title. Are you prepared to recruit for it?’ Those are reasonable questions. If they make the room uncomfortable, perhaps the room needs examining. I don’t want Pochettino running every department. I want him to have enough authority that when he identifies a problem, somebody has to address it. ‘I need a midfielder.’ ‘We’ve signed you a winger.’ ‘That hasn’t answered what I said.’ Good. Have that argument before another season falls apart. And the Glazers overruling INEOS would hardly prove the club is well run. You’ve got competing groups choosing a manager, and the supporters are left hoping the right people won the argument. Back Pochettino properly now. Give him clear responsibility and hold the executives to theirs. Berrada and Wilcox should be judged on whether the manager succeeds. Their job cannot keep being to explain why the last one failed.”