Manchester United co-owners INEOS failed to properly inquire about Dan Ashworth before appointing him as sporting director.
The Red Devils brought the 53-year-old to Carrington last July following the end of his gardening leave at Newcastle United.
However, Ashworth only lasted five months before being shown the door (or terminating his contract by mutual consent as the club put it in the official statement released on Sunday).
Over the last 24 hours or so, more and more details are coming to light regarding the circumstances that led to the early divorce.
Sky Sports News senior reporter Melissa Reddy blames INEOS for their lack of due diligence while making the appointment in the first place.
The correspondent reveals how Ashworth was required to perform tasks he wasn’t necessarily familiar with.
“The question will be asked about the due diligence Man Utd did over Dan Ashworth,” reports Reddy.
“He hasn’t changed his approach, his demeanour, the way he wants to work. He’s a very good organisational and operational head, he’s not very hands on but he makes sure the structure is working directly and goes into different departments to make sure the right people are in place.
“We’ve seen that at Brighton and the FA, the things he introduces have a long-lasting impact.
“He’s never been a transfer guru or at the cutting edge of analytics, that’s not him. But we’re hearing that’s what Sir Jim Ratcliffe wanted out of him.”
Why Dan Ashworth wasn’t the profile INEOS were seeking
Ashworth was also accused of being too passive, but as Reddy explains, that is simply his nature.
“With regards to being passive, that’s just his nature. He’s not confrontational or in-your-face. One of the points made by people close to Ashworth is that when he tried to get good data firms to come in, that was vetoed by Sir Jim, who himself had admitted the club’s analytics is nowhere near up to scratch.
The journalist then wonders if Sir Jim Ratcliffe and INEOS are now adopting the same approach to the Glazers which lost them the support of the Reds’ fanbase.
“That begs the question of whether United have clarity over what they want. Add this to the Erik ten Hag situation, he was so close to losing his job, they kept him and backed him heavily in the transfer market only to sack him after 13 games.
“INEOS will say they are willing to back someone until they show someone they’re not the right fit. But amid the mass redundancies, and the ticket-price hike, there’s a growing sentiment among supporters that ordinary people continue to pay for the mistakes of the hierarchy.
“That was the Glazers initially, and now INEOS. It’s up to them to prove these are just teething issues as they try to get the right structure in place, you always have some sort of problems with new people and a new takeover. Is it that, or is this going to be an unwanted habit?”