Share
20th May 2016
06:40pm BST
Reid is the owner of Security Search Management & Solutions (SSMS), the firm whose approach to security search management and its solutions provided the latest embarrassment for Manchester United last weekend.
United couldn’t be blamed for what happened at Old Trafford on what was supposed to be the final day of the season. Reid took responsibility for the incident when a mobile phone made up to look like a bomb was left in an Old Trafford lavatory, which led to the stadium being evacuated and the match eventually abandoned. “I am absolutely gutted,” Reid said.
Reid talked to reporters outside his home in Biggin Hill, south London. “To say I am sorry doesn't seem adequate, but I am. There was something found, they dealt with it in the way they should have done. Whether they should have found it earlier is another issue.”
United were not to blame on that occasion. They couldn’t be blamed either when their coach came under attack from West Ham fans marking the last game at Upton Park with a bit of bottle-throwing which resulted in the kick-off being delayed.
Some might even excuse United for the failure to make White Hart Lane in time for kick-off in April after the coach driver attempted a shortcut to beat the traffic, but found himself unable to get under a bridge on the road he had taken. The game started late that day too.
There was no one person at Manchester United who could be deemed responsible for all these problems, nobody who could reasonably be held accountable for the randomness of an attack by supporters, the misjudgement of a coach driver and the failure of a man schooled at the university of life to notice that he had left a pretend pipe bomb behind in the toilet at Old Trafford.
At Manchester United these days, it does seem to be one damn thing after another, a hard-knock life of chaos and pandemonium, an ongoing sense that things are beyond the control of those in charge of making sure things are under control.
They have entered an age of reasonableness which is hard to distinguish from indecision, and which is so different to all that went before.
Just over ten years ago, Manchester United were emerging from a bleak winter during a rare disappointing season. Following their exit from the Champions League in the group stage, Alex Ferguson had no option but to take the League Cup seriously as he searched for a trophy. United were 15 points behind the defending champions Chelsea the day they played Wigan Athletic in the Carling Cup final in March 2006.
As Daniel Taylor recounts in 'This Is the One', a few Sunday papers that morning suggested Ferguson would be sacked if United didn’t beat Wigan in the final. United had endured a mutinous spell which included the departure of Roy Keane following a series of incidents which culminated in the club captain’s interview on MUTV after a defeat at Middlesbrough
United beat Wigan so there would be no sacking that week. After their 4-0 success at the Millennium Stadium, one brave reporter asked Ferguson if the victory “buys you some time?”
Ferguson. Taylor wrote, repeated the question incredulously. “Buy me time? Buy me time? Let me tell you something. The problem you press have got is that you don’t get tidbits out Manchester United any more. The Glazers are in America and won’t speak to you. David Gill gives you nothing, absolutely nothing. All your wee sources have been cut off at the very top of the club and because of that, you invent stuff in your own minds. Your imagination is amazing. But listen, you haven’t got a clue. Not a bloody clue.”
Ferguson would go on, buying time and taking on time itself, joking six years later that he was “outliving death”. But when he retired in 2013, the energy and the unreasonableness that suggested death itself could be defied left Old Trafford with him.
“I’m sure football clubs could learn a lesson or two from companies that have a successful history of navigating management transitions,” Ferguson wrote in his most recent book, 'Leading'. “I was never asked the question I have since learned is commonly posed by CEOs of many companies: ‘If you get hit by a bus, who takes your place?’”
United seemed unprepared for his retirement, even if it has emerged subsequently that among those sounded out were Pep Guardiola, Jürgen Klopp and Carlo Ancelotti. Then David Moyes received the call to come to Ferguson’s house which he did even though he was wearing jeans. When he arrived, he was given the news that he was the next Manchester United manager, with Ferguson telling Moyes that he could inform only one person of this development - his wife.
Moyes seemed to have many of Ferguson’s qualities, but he lacked that core defiance, the raging unreasonableness they had become used to at Old Trafford.
He took on the job thinking he was embarking on a long-term project, although even on the day he was unveiled he acknowledged that time was not what it was.
“I don’t think you could ever ask for time now,” he said, but with a six-year contract he may have assumed that you could ask for a bit more of it than he got.
United suddenly seemed like a club with less ambition. “Are Everton in today?” became the snide question asked at the training ground when some at United wanted to know if the manager was in his office.
If the potency of Ferguson couldn’t be replaced, the departure of Gill was almost as damaging. United lost power, control and knowledge. Ed Woodward, the executive vice-chairman, became the top figure at the club, after several years boosting the commercial revenue at Old Trafford.
In this area, Manchester United can have no complaints, unless you are a fan wondering why the eve of the Cup final is the time to collaborate on an X-Men promotion.
https://twitter.com/ManUtd/status/733613698644738048But those objections will be overruled by the figures. A week ago, United released their third-quarter results, with revenue up 29.9 per cent. During a conference call with investors, Woodward said United were on course to make more than half a billion pounds in revenue this year.
United have more commercial partners than any other Premier League club. They include an official casual footwear partner in South Korea, an official male shampoo partner in Vietnam, Singapore and Indonesia, and an official wine partner.
In their gathering of sponsors, United can be diligent and methodical, even if this season there have also been moments when the sponsors have expressed doubts about matters which shouldn’t be part of a sponsor’s remit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6MkmonoaSwLast summer, Adidas replaced Nike as the club’s kit sponsor. In January, the chief executive of Adidas, Herbert Hainer, commented on their satisfaction with the deal, but added, “even if the current playing style of Man United is not exactly what we want to see”.
This criticism was made under the management of Louis Van Gaal, but it could have been voiced under Moyes. For many reasons, it’s unlikely anyone would have said it under Ferguson.
Moyes’ first summer was characterised by a hesitancy in the transfer market. Moyes was planning for six years, not one window so decided against a move for Mesut Ozil. He wasn’t ready to sign Thiago Alcantara who went to Bayern Munich, while a pursuit of Cesc Fabregas got nowhere. In the end, United signed Marouane Fellaini.
By January, United felt they had to take action, so they pursued Juan Mata, although Woodward was reluctant to deal directly with Chelsea in case he ended up selling the London club Wayne Rooney by mistake.
“I’m hoping to be myself,” Moyes had said when he was appointed, but as the season went on, it was clear being himself wasn’t enough. Maybe, it was never enough, maybe Moyes hadn’t been hired to be himself. He had been hired in part because of some mystical and unproven connection between Scottishness and good management, a belief Alex Ferguson had in the superiority of his own upbringing and the special qualities of the Scottish people.
“Scots don’t leave Scotland to escape the past,” he wrote in another autobiography, making a sweeping and meaningless statement. They leave, Ferguson explained, to be successful. Leaving created a resolution and a determination to gets things done. Moyes, Ferguson said, had some of these traits and came from a good family. “I’m not saying that’s a reason to hire someone but you like to see good foundations in someone appointed to such high office.”
Moyes couldn’t live up to this. United craved strong leadership and a resemblance to what had gone before. Instead, Moyes was himself and he met resistance from players who had grown used to someone else.
After a defeat on his return to Goodison Park, United’s chances of finishing in the top four had gone. There was more speculation and the following day, unlike in the past, the press did have a bloody clue what was going on.
On the Monday, journalists who covered the club discovered that the decision had been taken to dismiss Moyes. They tweeted it and published stories online at an agreed time. Moyes was unaware of the decision, finding out for certain the following morning when he met Woodward who confirmed that Moyes would be sacked after 295 days in the job.
Perhaps it is this mistake United have tried to avoid in their planning for next season which may or may not involve Louis Van Gaal.
In 2014, Van Gaal was appointed to fill the craving for a strong leader. “People know him as a larger than life character,” Woodward said when Van Gaal was confirmed as manager, “but I have also been extremely impressed by his intelligence, thoughtful approach to the role and his diligence. I'm looking forward to working with him.”
All those things were fine, but the thinking was clear: they now had a larger than life manager who could handle the weight of managing Manchester United.
Two years later and Van Gaal could be said to have handled the weight of managing United, if he hadn’t also been expected to provide winning, dynamic football.
In his first year, he took United back into the Champions League when they finished fourth, but they exited in the group stage this season, entering a long winter from which they are still trying to emerge on the final weekend of the season.
Since December, Van Gaal has had to deal with stories that he would be sacked and replaced by Jose Mourinho.
They approach Saturday’s FA Cup final with this usual incidental music playing in the background and Van Gaal’s future - or lack of it - will become clear in the coming days.
The failure to finish in the top four should be the catalyst for change, just as it was when Moyes was dismissed, but defeat against Palace at Wembley would bring Van Gaal’s time to a messy end.
Few can believe that victory on Saturday would buy Van Gaal time, not when the season has unfolded as it had, not when United moved into a position to take top four in the final week, only to lose at West Ham.
United have hesitated all season. Woodward has developed a friendship with Van Gaal, but he was also Woodward's appointment so there is a natural desire to see him succeed. If United had finished in the top four, it may have been declared a success even though it was something else. Now there is no room for a fudge.
https://twitter.com/sportsjoedotie/status/719120068215308288In pursuit of the guarantees of success which Manchester United thought they were getting when they sacked Moyes and appointed Van Gaal, Jose Mourinho may well be appointed.
During the tedious days under Van Gaal, the Manchester United fans have chanted ‘attack, attack, attack’. In pursuit of the Manchester United way, they might now turn to Mourinho in the hope he will return to these values.
Mourinho promotes a different type of football. He will not attack and he will certainly not attack, attack, attack, no matter how much he promises to observe the great traditions. But he will dominate the club and things will be done his way. This may be enough for United who are getting desperate now. If they appoint Mourinho, they may be abandoning some of their beliefs. But they will recognise something of their past and hope that this time the age of reasonableness can come to an end.
Explore more on these topics:
