Manchester United Thread 25/26 - Teamtalk/Transfers/Gossip Mod Note in OP 26.09.24

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122973690#Comment_122973690

On the 'holidays' part - Casemiro posted images to Instagram of him at Disney and other places. People just didn't care as much. IMO if Rashford had been sat at home, Casemiro being in America would never have been mentioned. Casemiro was just lumped in with Rashford, imo.

paulbok

Doesn't that leave him at the % threshold of having to make full takeover offer?

Iseedeadpixels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122973679#Comment_122973679

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news

Article

BREAKING NEWS Sir Jim Ratcliffe pumps another £79m into Man United to increase his stake in the club - but here's why the huge cash injection will NOT benefit Ruben Amorim in the January window

Sir Jim Ratcliffe raised his stake to 28.94 per cent with the £79million injection

Mail Sport understands that the £79m is not to be used in the January window

Sir Jim Ratcliffe has injected a further £79million into Manchester United, increased his stake in the club and changed ownership of his involvement to his Ineos company.

The petrochemicals billionaire paid around £1.2bn for 27.7 per cent of the club earlier this year and agreed to invest $300m (£237m) as part of the deal.

A filing listed on the US Securities and Exchange Commission has confirmed the final payment of $100m (£79m) and a raise in shareholding to 28.94 per cent. It has also disclosed that ownership of those shares has transferred from Ratcliffe to Ineos.

Mail Sport understands that the £79m is not earmarked to go into a January war chest for new manager Ruben Amorim.

The investment had been earmarked for infrastructure but will be used across the club.

Ineos have carried out a wide range of cost-cutting since their arrival, which will allow the injection to go to areas of need, rather than be swallowed by costs.

It is also understood that when the deal was struck with majority owners the Glazer family, it was more straightforward for Ratcliffe’s name to go on the shares, given that his money was used.

However, all of his other clubs and sports groups go under the Ineos umbrella and his part-ownership of United will now join that stable.

Ratcliffe has overseen a chaotic spell at Old Trafford since arriving at the club 12 months ago, despite watching Manchester United lift the FA Cup under Erik ten Hag at the end of last campaign.

The Red Devils, who were weighing up the Dutchman's future ahead of their Wembley final, extended Ten Hag's contract before sacking him four months later following a dismal start to the new Premier League season.

Ratcliffe gave Ten Hag more than £200million to spend in the summer transfer market before parting ways with him in October, shelling out £15m in compensation.

He also prized Dan Ashworth away from Newcastle as sporting director before he made the decision to dispense with his services last week after only a few months in the role.

The 72-year-old has similarly made a string of unpopular decisions, such as a mid-season move to raise matchday ticket prices to £66 per game - with no concessions for children or pensioners - while more than 250 club staff have been made redundant.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-14209435/Sir-Jim-Ratcliffe-increases-stake-Manchester-United.html

pjohnson

You'd swear Garnacho was the established player and Rashford the up and coming kid with the responses each have had.

I'd have hope for Garnacho but Rashford better be off in January.

Mitch Connor

Is it significant that he has now transferred ALL the shares he owned to INEOS. Previously it was the Trawlers company, so INEOS had not direct ownership - if i have understood things correctly. (there are ineos people on the board of Trawlers, but Trawlers was not an INEOS company. Now the shares belong to INEOS specifically - so is it possible that in terms of financing we are now in a much better position with a legal link to INEOS and their revenues?

DM_7

Winter was made redundant a few months ago and is not currently employed with one of the major media outlets in the UK.

He would only have at the event as part of Rashford's profile building or to help in carefully relaying what Rashford wanted to say.

Not necessarily Rashford himself asking for him but the people he pays to look after his image and interests. The news came out in very controlled way without a huge amount of sensationalist commentary, compared to how it would be reported through a person reporting to an editor.

Overall it was tame and gently helps his cause to get a move if that what he wants and needs. The club probably need that and so does he to help him get a move.

With all that has happened over the years I don't actually mind what Rashford has done here compared to how nuclear he could have gone, he has seen how Ronaldo and Sancho got their way and he has not gone that far. He has been through a lot at the club and if a move for both parties is needed he has taken a step to help a move without damaging chances of a good fee or contract for either party.

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122973807#Comment_122973807

It only hurts his chances of a move, because it reduces United bargaining power when talking to suiters. If the offers drop because the player has come out and publicly said he wants to leave then there may well be a price point where the club decides not to sell.

If the manager drops him from the squad because of this interview and his attitude then he is out of the shop window which again will have an effect on the offers and the number of clubs interested.

Know what could have helped him get a move? Keeping things private, putting some work in, getting onto the pitch, scoring goals and displaying a talent that clubs might want to invest in.

BenK

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974058#Comment_122974058

Yeah i think people have been over complicating this.

Rashford has not been very good at playing football in recent times. The best way to get a good transfer is to get back to performing at a decent level. This interview was just an unnecessary self-serving distraction; he seems to have more interest in the PR game than the actual game of football.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122973644#Comment_122973644

But is that not the job of someone in media relations at the club?

Why is it the case that he can be doing something like this and nobody at the club is aware that a journalist may show up and have unbridled access to one of the most talked about players in world football who plays for them and they plan on selling shortly?

Winter said it has been organised planned and postponed for a significant enough time.

Miley Byrne

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122973672#Comment_122973672

Sorry but can you provide a link to where the club put him up for sale before he gave the interview to Winter there please? Not tenuous or speculative either, thanks

jayo44

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974559#Comment_122974559

Why would the club be responsible for it? He was on a day off and they do not control his entire life.

He has media responsibility to the club I'd assume he has to complete but that doesn't stop him from talking to any journalist he feels like in his day off.

I don't hate Rashford I just don't think he has been very good at playing football for last year and a half but this is something entirely different. Rashford comes across as a young man that thinks the world owes something to him just because his parents weren't rich when he grew up.

I'd be embarrassed to talk about some of the things we had to do to get by when I grew up in the 80s but I'd like to think they made me a hard worker that feels happy to achieve the maximum I can in life.

FourFourRED

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974559#Comment_122974559

Yeah good point I suppose. I did read very recently that the club had cut some of the media/communications staff so that might be part of it.

On a separate note, I quite like Winter. I’m surprised he wasn’t snapped up by The Atheltic when he was laid off. Maybe more gardening leave stuff going on 😂

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974613#Comment_122974613

Was he Jose's mouthpiece for a while?

I watched the video posted here with him yesterday and was impressed by how he spoke and backed up what he said. Adds a good bit of context to the quotes.

I had watched with scepticism that there was some sort of misquote or twisting of words but it doesn't sound like that. He even mentioned that Rashford was calm, relaxed and he'd normally be quite introverted.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974574#Comment_122974574

The well connected club journalists who Winter said "wouldn't put their name to it unless it was true" printed the stories. You can choose to believe that or not I guess…

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974574#Comment_122974574

Ok, they didn't brief all the journalists that came out with the same story, on the same night. The club had zero to do with it. No such thing as a brief. I appoligise for insinuating otherwise.

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974637#Comment_122974637

Nah, anyone thinking Rashford is up for sale is dreaming, no reason to think he is. The journo's just made it up.

Miley Byrne

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974673#Comment_122974673

OK thanks

FourFourRED

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974628#Comment_122974628

Not sure if Winter was but I feel like Duncan Castle’s was definitely involved.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974748#Comment_122974748

That was the one.

PARlance

I hate it when the matches come around and get in the way of the drama!

Any leaked team news?

markc91

No leaks yet?

Mitch Connor

Andrea Berta, the at Madrid sporting director is leaving December 31.

Has been linked to replace Ashworth, no idea if there's a connection.

Arsenal also looking for anew guy and I reckon they would be more likely. I don't think we are going to replace ashworth with that type of hire.

He's probably announced where he's going as I'm typing this....

Tandey

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974836#Comment_122974836

There should be unless the club did something since the last game to try eradicate it, hmm.

bucketybuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974673#Comment_122974673

There is an absolute world of difference between giving journalists a brief and giving journalists direct quotes and statements.

The media is chock full of talk every single day regarding things like transfers, most of it comes from "sources" in the clubs but they all come with plausible deniability so the club can pretend they never wanted to sell if it suits them later. As long as nobody is formally on record as saying it in the first place.

"Word on the street" that United wanted to sell, versus Rashford publicly and blatantly saying he wants to leave.

We both know very well that they aren't the same thing.

y0ssar1an22

no leaks so far it seems

Caustic

I dont really see why the club would leak that rashford is for sale to the media, what benefit is it for them, they might have chosen to sell him alright they could have gotten in contact with an agent or agents, journalists will have sources in all sorts of places and we know that united is far from solid in that regard.So while the story is likely true, i dont see any upside to the club releasing the story themselves.

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974861#Comment_122974861

If it was a brief, and imo it was, its the club telling people they want to sell.

Not an official statement no, but it's the club putting out info it wants public.

I actually don't see a difference between the club telling journalists to push a story and direct quotes in this type of instance. The player and his agent would know they did it, so it's effectively the same. The journalists asking him the questions know it too. Especially when it's multiple journos. The plausable denibility is just PR stuff.

If the story on Tuesday morning was "people close to Rashford have said he's ready for a new challenge' I think you'd be treating it very similarly no? Using the media to put a story out without officially tying his name to it.

Would you have been happier with that? Would you have said, well it's not an official statement directly attributable so it's grand?

Tandey

De Light and Rashford not even on the bench according to Tyrone Marshall.

GolfPar

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122974914#Comment_122974914

Well Rashford isn't with the squad so that much in true.

FourFourRED

the team