Will he or wont he return? Will Eddie Thompson eventually get his hands on United? Will the present board remain in place? Will it make any difference…
(First published on 13th December 2001, by Barca 87)
As we debate who will eventually take-over the running of our club, it is normally on the basis of who is best placed to take the club forward and maximise the opportunities that modern football now offers. This would be fine if we were an English Premier League club, or one half of the two most successful teams in Scotland, sadly for us, and the several clubs that have gone before us, I think it wont make any difference.
In the last few years Hearts, Motherwell, Aberdeen and now it would appear us, have been subject to board-room squabbles on the future direction of the club, the acquired debt and who can provide a platform for success. No club has yet welcomed the mythical knight in shining armour, and I don’t think we will be next.
What can we expect?
Scenario 1:
It would appear likely that McLean will be back (SFA permitting). He essentially wants to halt the slide in the value of his shares and the club. With a £2.5 million debt the room for manoeuvre is limited.
It would appear, thankfully, that Smith, Malpas and Hegarty are safe. Rightly so – imagine where we would be without their work at the end of last season. So in order to address the value of the club that must mean reduce the debt – Sell.
Sell who and in what timescale.
McLean talks about being at the club for a period of about 5 weeks. In that time realistically there would be three players – Danny Griffin, Jamie McCunnie and Paul Gallacher that would interest anyone for a half decent sum of money.
Given that English clubs now know we are in debt and eager to sell we would witness a situation similar to Hearts with Griffin going for a max of £1.2 million (of which we receive only 50%). Yes, he is worth more, but English clubs have figured the SPL out – “all clubs are in the mire – we can drive the price down”. McCunnie and Gallacher may go for a combined fee of £1.5.
There, the debt is reduced but the team has lost its three most prominent and important players. Who would want to buy a team that has just lost its three key players and would face difficulty in securing funds to replace them?
It might be a bit extreme this scenario, but not an impossibility.
Who else can be sold to generate the money McLean needs to reduce the debt? Thommo (and I am one of his fans!)!? Sell off or free half the reserve and youth sides? Is 5 weeks enough time to restructure the internal workings of the club to reduce such a debt? None of these questions hav been answered.
Scenario 2:
Eddie Thompson comes in. Thompson is as close as Arabs have to the great knight. However, we all know that does not mean he has money to throw at United. For him to come in it would now appear McLean would have to be there first. Would Thompson want to buy a team minus three key players? If he could not finance a signing of similar stature to Griffin would he be in it for the long haul?
Scottish football is littered with good intentions but no successes – Hearts and Motherwell are testament to that.
Scenario 3:
The board stays. Most are agreed a change is needed but lets consider for a moment the fact this board sanctioned some of the most important purchases made by a United manager in recent years: namely Lilley, Lauchlan and Miller.
I don’t think there are many Arabs who would not rate those three as among the best signings made by a United manager since Pedersen, Zetterlund and Olafsson arrived. When we needed the board to show us the colour of their money it can not be denied that they did exactly that.
I think that signings of that nature are the best we and any other Scottish club can expect to make. We can’t afford any more and no one will make a big difference on that. Certainly not a McLean return, nor an Eddie Thompson type figure.
There are areas that are not good enough. From not having the home strip ready for the start of the season or an Internet site available until recently. To that effect it is ridiculous is that a man like Thompson can not be brought into the fold to move United forward in a constructive manner.
He could offer an expertise that the board presently lack. There are not many men jumping up and down to be on the board of football clubs full stop, far less one who has been going to watch United over the last 30 years, and in this context the board are failing United.
I am though worried about McLean, and as the architect of our clubs greatest years it is sad to say that. His plans for the club are not clear, and in the worse case scenario damaging for the club on the pitch. Would he have sanctioned the signing of Lilley?
He has appeared to forget that he built the great United side on signing key players to augment a young side – the contributions of Bannon and Pettigrew for example were vital – but at the time they were expensive.
As I said a couple of weeks ago, I think we are heading in the right direction – this does not help. This is a view held by Danny Griffin and Alex Smith, it is a view that is good enough for me.
