Losing Rashford is the club's failure

When you fail to fully develop and ultimately end up losing an asset like Rashford, yes - it’s the club’s failure.

Not necessarily the club’s fault, or not exclusively the club’s fault, but definitely the club’s failure.

A lot of people seem to struggle with this notion, preferring a more simplistic idea of the player receiving huge wages & failing to produce, with the club a passive bystander to this.

It’s what the rage-baiting YouTubers have been telling them, in their never-ending bid to manufacture toxicity, which in turns brings engagement & revenue.

Beautiful irony, isn’t is, that the folks making a living out of producing toxicity, are the ones accusing players of being toxic while making a living.

Why do I mantain that the club must own this as its failure?

1. As a general rule, whether you are a company, a club or any other entity, your try to maximize the assets you have.

If you fail to do so, the failure is yours, regardless of the whats and hows and whys. From the club’s perspective, that’s irrelevant - the end result is what matters.

And if the end result is failing to develop & ultimately losing the asset, then the club suffers the negatives.

It’s not like Rashford is the only asset we messed up with.

2. United obviously didn’t do enough to develop Rashford. His initial promise was greater than the product we ended up with, with only occassional hints of his brilliance.

This is mostly due to constant changes in managers, game models, tactics, roles and duties, but also a good amount of misprofiling and a lack of compatibility with immediate teammates.

When Rashford had a CF and LB he could play with, he usually thrived. When he was used as an attacking outlet, he usually thrived.

3. Rashford - and others players - had to go through countless managers, game models, corporate upheavals, club restarts and other emotional rollecoasters.

It’s been sheer chaos, a maelstorm of constant change, insecurity, fan anger & ferocious anxiety. It’s taken a toll for sure.

4. After his best season at United - ETH’s first one im charge - Rashford’s role was dramatically changed yet again, and his naturally output collapsed.

But all you could read about was his alleged lack of effort and lack of goals, with a complete disregard for changes in the tactical context.

How was he supposed to stay super-motivated? He had just had a dream season and saw his role changed, yet again, in a way that highlighted his flaws and failed to use his strengths.

5. If there had been off-field issues, and there seem to have been quite a few, can you really claim it had nothing to do with the total professional chaos the boy was brought up in?

It’s not like Rashford is completely innocent, but the club did all it could to provide him with a terrible environment to develop, grow and succeed. Over and over again.