We have gracefully ushered into the epoch where esteemed and faultless bald men claim the spotlight. For Ineos at Manchester United, this juncture couldn’t be any better. At present, no fault lies with them and each solution they devise is unique to their approach. They represent optimism, a clear, unmuddied horizon, an unvoiced critique from the sidelines. They are an untied-necktie-wearing Tony Blair performing with Shed Seven in Downing Street’s gardens. Even their missteps are somewhat praiseworthy because they are distanced from the errors.
But this stage will quickly fade. Decisions that pertain to the crux of the game will have to be contemplated and evidenced. Currently, it seems highly implausible that Erik Ten Hag will retain his position by the close of the season.
The standard for Champions League qualification has already been established as a retentive aim. On a larger scale, this boils down to choosing an ideology. Individuals pulling the strings must act, and those seeking progress must locate their avenue for advancement. The most blatant opportunity here is the individual at the pitch’s edge. Ignoring it would almost be an affront to their methodology.
Which brings us to Gareth Southgate who, as of the recent weekend, is the frontrunner for the next managerial role at Manchester United. Pondering the implications of this brings forth myriad thoughts.
There are several conditions that must be met before this can become a reality. Firstly, a vacancy must present itself (which is likely). Southgate must be ready for the role (his contract with England is set to expire this year). Both sides must show willingness (rumours suggest United are interested). Most crucially, public opinion must not trigger a large-scale outcry that would lead to fans protesting at Old Trafford.
The most intriguing aspect for the time being is the anticipated public response. Initially, when it was suggested a few months ago, it seemed like a horrendous idea, almost a tale spun out of jest. Stances will be taken on Southgate, and the first slip-up or underwhelming play will set off an avalanche of pre-planned outrage. Internet commentators will have a field day while others will express their resentment professionally yet passionately. Would it not be wiser to steer clear of this tangle?
After careful reflection, it has struck me clear as day: might the solution to Manchester United’s troubles lie in Southgate? Honestly, it might just be the perfect concept, one that’s so compelling it leaves no room for consideration of other alternatives.
Manchester United has been burdened over the past decade by various complications specific to its industrial structure. Essentially, the club has been at a standstill for the past ten years, resembling a haunted mansion, a spectral vessel filled with the living dead, echoing with strange sounds, a place where history keeps consuming the present.
A significant change is needed to catalyse progression. Manchester United doesn’t require a tactical genius, but rather a systems’ analyst, someone who can efficiently purge and cleanse the club from its stagnancy. Southgate fits this description, he is the proven professional with a consistent track record of unblocking stagnant football organizations and transforming them into more vibrant and joyous institutions.
This is exactly what he did with England. Trust me, he achieved it. Truly. Take a quick journey back in time, browse through the prolific squad list between 2000-2016, observe the actual footage, and acknowledge that he accomplished this feat even if he pleaded with people to tolerate players taking the knee or excluded certain players, earning him the title of a “substitute teacher fraud” among some critics.
Southgate would be a fitting match for United’s new proprietors. He’s familiar with the workings of the Brailsford-Ashworth connection. He has a knack for mentoring young players. He managed the DNA programme with England, establishing a sense of organic growth, something that Manchester United currently lacks.
Most importantly, he embodies the virtues that have seemingly eluded this institution: strength of character, decisiveness and a commitment to honesty. The question remains, who has spoken the truth at Old Trafford in the past ten years? Ralf Rangnick did, but he was instantly shunted aside. Louis van Gaal tried but was reduced to shouting into a storm. Southgate would speak his mind, causing discomfort perhaps, but ultimately leading to improvement.
One can almost visualise the scene, Southgate defying the media, sticking to his guns and making no pledges in a press conference. Assertive as a Lutheran minister, with a stern demeanor and a hint of judgment, Southgate establishes a deep impression on Antony. After a gallant defeat in the Europa League finale, Southgate acknowledges the fanbase, donned in casual attire, eliciting a sense of pride and courage in everyone present.
This situation does require a catharsis, something akin to an organisational overhaul. The ensuing public outcry becomes indispensable. Social media influencers must shout and express outrage, all digital platforms and content creators must feel the pinch. Southgate, enigmatic and elusive, gives them no leverage. There’s no room for traction. Meanwhile, his utterances mirror our ambiguities and our insufficiencies. Southgate doesn’t profess quick fixes. He envisions not immediate success but seeks redemption, purity – he hopes for a day when the filth will be cleansed.
While Southgate’s ideas might sound fantastical, bordering on fanatical and certainly falling short of what might actually occur, the portrayal of him as a saviour is in fact a misrepresentation. It’s a perfect instance of the ‘Great Man’ theory – the belief that a single individual can rectify a failing system. Cherry-picking Southgate for this role merely because he comes across as sincere and wise, with no genuine success in managing a football club, can in itself be problematic.
In an ideal world, it would be fantastic to see Southgate in every role. Not limited to the football world. From taking charge of the railways to running Boots, the notion is to bask in the glory of a fabricated Southgate persona. These high hopes might be the onset of dictatorship, a misplaced longing for an imagined past, encapsulated in a dignified figure in a finely tailored suit. Perhaps, Southgate could potentially be the most menacing figure in Britain.
More than likely, this has transformed into a narrative about Manchester United’s real situation. The reason behind its inordinate obsession, and the need to endlessly mull over why an affluent football club has ranked sixth instead of second, tends to lend itself to a grand narrative of decay.
The dynamic of Manchester United being representative of Britain is palpable. This football entity appears to symbolise more emphatically the notion of decline that’s perceived in contemporary existence. This includes the dilution of previously esteemed values, deterioration of institutions and elements that essentially don’t function adequately, all seemingly by design.
The ongoing query seems to be whether things can be rectified, a question constantly associated with Manchester United. Could the solution potentially reside with distinguished individuals such as Sir Jim Ratcliffe and the unlikely Southgate, a wealth holder of 53 years who might have apicultural ambitions?
Emerging prominently, a shining reformer amidst the ruins of what once was Camelot seems quite an exhausting prospect. It is probable to suggest that it may be another alluring yet deceptive narrative. -Guardian