This article discusses the potential appointment of Michael Carrick as the permanent manager of Manchester United, drawing parallels and contrasts with the previous appointment of Ole Gunnar Solskjær. Here’s a breakdown of the key points:
* The Solskjær Precedent (and Failure): the author argues that United rushed into appointing Solskjær permanently after a short period of positive results, specifically after beating Paris Saint-germain. They had a limited sample size and ultimately made a mistake, exacerbated by the later signing of Cristiano Ronaldo. the author emphasizes they could have waited for more evidence.
* Carrick’s Situation: Carrick has 16 games left to prove himself, a similar timeframe to Solskjær’s initial period. The author cautions against simply repeating past mistakes.
* Criticism of United’s Decision-Making: The article criticizes United’s history of making decisions based on public opinion or the suggestions of former players (like Rio ferdinand) rather than sound governance and thorough evaluation.
* Carrick’s Record: While not overwhelmingly extraordinary, Carrick’s record is described as “reasonable.” He has the second-best win percentage of any Middlesbrough manager in recent history and was unbeaten in a short caretaker spell at United. Though, the author stresses this doesn’t automatically qualify him.
* Avoiding Direct Comparisons: The author warns against assuming that as Sir Alex Ferguson was given time to succeed, every manager deserves the same patience. Each situation is unique.
* Context of Recent Win: The recent victory over Manchester City is downplayed, noting City was dealing with numerous injuries and recent poor form (including a Champions League loss to Bodø/Glimt).
In essence,the article is a cautionary tale about hasty decisions at Manchester United,urging the club to carefully evaluate Carrick’s performance over the remaining games before committing to a permanent appointment,rather than repeating the mistakes made with Solskjær.
