‘Will Amorim really change anything at Manchester United?’ 11 of your questions answered

Following the sacking of Erik ten Hag, Manchester United fans have been left with a flood of questions — many of which surrounded the appointment of his successor, Ruben Amorim.

After intense negotiations with Sporting Lisbon, the club has now confirmed Amorim as United’s new manager.

Sporting has insisted that Amorim remain until the international break, meaning he’ll still lead them against Manchester City in the Champions League on Tuesday.

As the major appointment unfolded, I was on hand to answer questions from Independent readers on the wider implications of Amorim’s appointment.

It’s a time of upheaval across the football world, and United’s latest managerial shift adds another layer to a season full of uncertainty and intrigue. Unsurprisingy then, I also tackled questions on whether we should still care about the Ballon d’Or, Newcastle’s controversial takeover and broader questions on the sport’s values and future.

Here are 11 questions from Independent readers – and my answers from the “Ask Me Anything” event.

Q: If the owners planned to sack Erik ten Hag at the first sign of trouble, why let him spend more money on signings this summer, only to make the next manager’s job harder?

Jamie

A:It’s an utterly baffling decision. Worse, it went against everything INEOS is supposed to be about. All of that high-performance culture is supposed to be about evidence and logic and ignoring emotion, but that decision was undeniably influenced by the emotion of the FA Cup final, even though the evidence of the season pointed to the need for change.

I think there are ultimately two other main issues that stopped them from making a change. One was indecision over who they should bring in. That was huge. And it wasn’t helped by the second major factor. That was that neither Berrada nor Ashworth were yet in their roles as CEO and director of football, respectively. The fact they are now in place means there has been more drive about this appointment.

Q: Is Amorim’s appointment a statement of intent from INEOS? Do they deserve some credit?

Sophieeeeeee

A: Yes, I do think it is a statement of intent. I think INEOS have got there in the end, and you can criticise elements of this process (not least the fact he won’t be starting for another three weeks) but it is ultimately acting decisively and swiftly to get a manager that a lot of other major clubs wanted. That is a coup, when a lot of people expected indefinite chaos.

Q: What do we make of Manchester United’s League Cup win against Leicester? A sign of new times to come or just a happy coincidence?

MattAllenby

A:It was a bit of everything. I think it’s mostly a classic case of players just feeling released when a manager who was having no effect goes.

It also shows the talent there. But, as we’ve seen before, this isn’t necessarily sustainable without proper structure. They need Amorim to impose that. So it’s not a complete coincidence, to answer your question. But it’s something that does happen a lot in these situations. I think it shows how important psychology is in football, at least in the short term.

Q: Do the current United players suit the new manager’s style of play?

Stephen Quill

A: I think this is a big question. I’ve reported before that United had previously been reluctant to appoint managers who played three at the back. That was a consideration in the summer when they didn’t go all in for Amorim – something that seems a surprise now.

On the whole, though, despite the dysfunction, a lot of these are modern adaptable players. Good coaches can use that. He will need his additions, eventually, but there is sufficient talent there.

He doesn’t like slow build-ups and wants intensity from his teams, and there are parallels with how Ten Hag wanted fast transitions. It should be hoped that Garnacho and Rashford are good for this, and it may also suit Bruno’s ability to release quick passes from distance.

Q: Is anything really going to change at Man Utd with Amorim?

djandyb

A: Just because one specific coach didn’t work, it doesn’t mean the idea is wrong. United probably do need to be at a stage now where they think about the next best thing, rather than constantly responding. Amorim does represent that.

I would also say the comparisons with Ten Hag are superficial. Yes, they both come from a second-tier league, which is where they have had all their success. But the Portuguese Primeira Liga is considered more challenging than the Eredivisie, which is almost seen as a development league by those in the Premier League.

Ajax had also been dominating the Dutch league long before Ten Hag. That isn’t the case with Sporting, who are one of Portugal’s big three, but very much the inferior party. It says much that this season would have been the first time in 70 years that they retained the title.

Also, put bluntly, Amorim is rated by many more major clubs than Ten Hag was. Spurs passed on Ten Hag because they didn’t think he had sufficient charisma. All of Liverpool, City, Bayern and Barca have been looking at Amorim.

Q: Do you think Ten Hag went because they got the yes from Amorim?

Callum

A: I think that is a fair reading. The performance wasn’t actually that bad against West Ham, and there was obviously the VAR decision, but that is sort of irrelevant because it had become clear in that October meeting that they needed to make a change. They’d pretty much settled on that.

The slight twist is that Amorim had initially been reticent because he wanted to stay and help Sporting retain the title, something they haven’t done for seven decades. On thinking about it, though, he realised this was an opportunity far too good to turn down.

Q: How soon will he be expected to challenge for the title? Presumably, he’ll be expected to win more than two trophies in his first two seasons.

Anthony Falvey

A: I don’t think it’s really about that. At United, really, domestic cups, well, they’re not irrelevant, but they don’t mean as much if they’re not matched by the ability to show you are making progress and can compete at the top level. I guess they will want that for the end of next season. It can happen quite quickly, to be fair, as other big clubs have shown.

Q: Why doesn’t Anorim wait a couple of years and take on Man City?

Don

A: Ultimately, it is Manchester United. It doesn’t take that much investment. The club is still a money-making machine. They’re so big it doesn’t take that much to set right.

Also, on the City side, Amorim feels the situation is too “fluid”. They don’t know what’s going to happen with Guardiola, and there’s also the potential outcome of the hearing. City insist on their innocence but, if found guilty, the repercussions could be huge. Amorim felt he had to take this opportunity now.

Q: Do any of the big wigs at Uefa or the top clubs care about the overall competitiveness of club football? It just seems the money in the game only flows upwards rather than downwards these days.

JoshP85

A: That is a huge theme of my new book States of Play. Ultimately, this entire era stems from the widespread deregulation of football, creating an almost entirely open transfer market just as vast sums of money began to flow into the sport. This system isn’t actually conducive to competitive team sport; it tends to have the opposite effect, leading to a self-perpetuating cycle of concentration.

You can track this shift through some of the major figures from before the sportswashing era. Former AC Milan owner Silvio Berlusconi spoke of a “virtuous cycle,” where investment in football would make teams more attractive, improving TV broadcasts, which in turn would drive up TV revenue and enhance the game further. Manchester United in the 1990s similarly recognised how they could use their immense commercial profile to improve the team. Real Madrid’s Florentino Perez observed United’s model but believed it could go further, envisioning a scenario in which star players themselves would generate substantial income — the Galacticos era.

There’s a reason we’re discussing Europe’s major clubs, of course. This entire system essentially leads to extreme concentration. In an open market, a big club attracts immense commercial interest, which they then use to acquire better players, widening the gap in each spin of this cycle. It’s self-perpetuating. And what happens as a result? European football started to cannibalise South American football. Western Europe then began to cannibalise the rest of Europe, with the biggest Western European clubs dominating even within Western Europe itself.

Now, the Premier League is cannibalising the rest of football, potentially even itself. I don’t think this is healthy for the diversity, vitality, or even development of the game.

Q: Will the Premier League fully investigate PIF/the Saudi regime and potentially force the sale of Newcastle?

Ross

A: The Premier League say they have no plans to act on the latest reports, which is remarkable. One line is that the WhatsApp leaks just show what has been said before. But then other Premier League clubs are still waiting for developments from when it said it would look into the details of the LIV Golf case, where PIF’s lawyers argued that the fund was “a sovereign instrumentality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia”.

So, in other words, “legally binding assurances” that directly contradicted previous “legally binding assurances”. And all of this comes at this mess of a time for the Premier League with the Man City APT case, which, of course, is a direct consequence of trying to regulate state ownership.

Q: Who actually cares about the Ballon D’or award?

Darkmaster

A: I agree in regards to what it’s become. I do quite like the old idea of recognising a football “MVP”, that is part of this prestigious lineage that includes players like Johan Cruyff and Franz Beckenbauer. There is a gravitas to that. It just doesn’t feel much like gravitas when it becomes a media campaign, as we saw with Real Madrid.

The irony is that, as farcical as this year became, I thought the actual race was one of the closest for some time. Both Vinicius and Rodri had very different but equally compelling claims. Rodri is football’s defining player right now, in terms of being central to the dominant tactical school. Vinicius is the decisive player, given how he settles so many big games with his goals.

It’s just the award is no longer about pure football. It has become a product of the modern game in that way, with all sorts of competing commercial forces. Madrid wanted it to due to what it means for the identity of the club. Man City’s owners wanted a Ballon d’Or due to its historic status.

These questions and answers were part of an ‘Ask Me Anything’ hosted by Miguel Delaney at 12pm GMT on Thursday 31 September. Some of the questions and answers have been edited for this article. You can read the full discussion in the comments section of the original article.

If you’re looking to delve into the complexities of how football has been shaped by outside influences, you may be interested my new book, States of Play, which aims to unravel this narrative. Find out more – including how to win a free copy – here.