Below is a summary of the full article. Click here for the full version from Liverpool.com or go back to LFC Live.
Gary Neville has compared the current chaos at Manchester United to the turbulent period Liverpool endured before Jürgen Klopp transformed the club, suggesting United is stuck in a similar cycle of instability and short-term thinking. He argues that, like the pre-Klopp Liverpool era, United has lacked a coherent long-term plan, cycled through managers with contrasting styles, and made disjointed transfer decisions that fail to build a clear footballing identity.
Neville points to the pressure surrounding Ole Gunnar Solskjær and the speculation over his future as a symptom of deeper structural issues rather than the sole cause of United’s problems. In his view, focusing only on whether Solskjær should stay or go mirrors how Liverpool once blamed individual managers instead of addressing ownership, recruitment, and strategic direction. He suggests that until United fixes its hierarchy, vision, and recruitment model, changing managers will only repeat the same pattern.
Drawing the comparison further, Neville highlights how Liverpool’s fortunes changed when a clear project was put in place: a defined playing style, aligned recruitment, patience with the manager, and a strong sporting structure around him. He implies that United must undergo a similar reset, appointing a decision-making framework above the head coach that can outlast any single manager and properly support whoever is in charge.
Neville also touches on fan frustration, noting that United supporters—like Liverpool’s in their wilderness years—are caught between loyalty to the manager and anger at the ownership and board. He believes that unless the club’s leadership confronts these structural failings, the atmosphere of crisis will continue, regardless of whether Solskjær remains or is replaced. The comparison to Liverpool serves as both a warning of how far a great club can fall and a reminder that, with the right long-term vision, a revival is still possible.
