Is this why José Mourinho is a bad fit for Manchester United?

Add as preferred source on Google

Embed from Getty Images

Manchester United Plc

Did you know that Manchester United have an “official global noodle partner”? Well, you do now! They are called Nissin Food Group, and according to their dedicated page on www.manutd.com, they can lay claim to inventing the “first iteration of instant noodles…in 1958.” United also have an “official feature film partner” (20^th Century Fox), an “official timekeeping partner” (Bulova), and an “official tyre partner for Europe (excluding Russia), India, the Middle East, and Thailand (Apollo Tyres)” In fact, they have so many commercial partners that they have to divide them into four categories on their website; global partners, regional partners, media and telecommunication partners, and financial partners, just in case you were wondering. With all that money rolling in, it is no wonder that the club is listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

This all points to one thing –  Manchester United is more than just a football club, it is a global brand. In his book, A Season in the Red, Jamie Jackson goes as far as to suggest that the United hierarchy are more focused on generating income in far-flung markets than they are on results, but for our purposes let’s just say that keeping up the corporate end is very important to Woodward and the Glazers.

For his part, Van Gaal did a decent turn as brand spokesman, though his criticism of the club’s pre-season tour of the United States in 2014 and his tendency to throw in phrases such as ‘sex masochism’ during interviews and press conferences probably left a few executives scratching their heads. The ‘Iron Tulip’ was brash and outspoken during his time at Carrington and Old Trafford, but he rarely did or said anything that would bring the Man Utd brand into disrepute.

Mourinho, on other hand, might not be so tame. His last season at Chelsea was eventful to say the least, with stadium bans, complaints about partial officials, petty comments about opposition managers, bizarre ramblings to the press, and reports of dressing room acrimony all hogging the headlines. Then there was the controversy over Mourinho’s treatment of Chelsea first-team doctor Eva Caneiro, a controversy which is still rumbling along in the courts, and one which might now be Manchester United’s problem as well.

There may be some method in Mourinho’s madness, of course. He seems to think that players thrive under a siege mentality, so all the barbs about referees, other coaches, the media, and even his own players, may well be designed to invite constructive encirclement. However, as we have seen before, this can only work for so long before it poisons the atmosphere at a club.

There are also doubts over whether he himself knows when and where to draw the line. After his Madrid side lost to Barcelona in the second-leg of the 2011 Supercopa de España, Mourinho was caught on camera gouging the eye of Barca assistant-coach Tito Vilanova. As if that wasn’t bad enough, he told the press afterwards that he did not know who ‘Pito’ (Spanish slang for penis) Vilanova was.

I don’t know about you, but if I was a corporate executive, I wouldn’t be too keen on such a person fronting my brand. Even Sir Bobby Charlton agrees, commenting in 2012 that “a United manager wouldn’t do that.” “Mourinho is a really good coach”, Charlton continued, “but that’s as far as I would go really.”

So the question that surely must be asked, is what has changed?

Featured Image: All rights reserved by The Sport Review