⏳Inter-Inzaghi talks: renewal or exit, Saudi and Juve interest👀
The heavy 5-0 defeat suffered by Paris Saint Germain in the Champions League final has left a deep mark on Inter, but in these hours the club is called to resolve another fundamental issue: the future of Simone Inzaghi.
The coach is considering a particularly enticing offer from Al-Hilal, which continues to push to bring him to Saudi Arabia, in addition to the sensational move made by Juventus in recent weeks.
Advertisement
A decisive meeting is set for today between the coach, President Marotta, Sporting Director Ausilio, and representatives of Oaktree: a summit that will clarify whether the paths between Inzaghi and Inter will separate or continue together.
The management has already started to consider alternatives such as De Zerbi and Fabregas, while the American ownership of Oaktree is pushing for the confirmation of the coach who has guaranteed significant revenues.
In fifteen days, Inter will be involved in the Club World Cup, making a decision on the future of the Nerazzurri bench unavoidable.
🤑 The future of Inzaghi and the offer from Al-Hilal
Coach Simone Inzaghi is at the center of Inter's evaluations, just days after the bitter defeat in the Champions League final.
Advertisement
In recent days, a very rich offer has arrived from Al-Hilal, which the coach has not closed, suggesting some doubt on his part as well. In Arabia, there is talk of a ready contract with figures ranging between 30 and 50 million euros per year for a couple of seasons.
Just in these hours, the appointed intermediary is in Milan to discuss the final details and get a definitive answer. The coach's decision must arrive within the next 24 hours.
💥 Today the decisive summit
Today a crucial meeting is set between Inzaghi and the Inter management. In a climate of bitterness and reflection after the European defeat, the parties will try to understand if there are still conditions to continue together.
Advertisement
Inter does not want to start the new season with a coach expiring on June 30, 2026, and for this reason, the club has already started to evaluate alternatives.
However, the American ownership of Oaktree, which has benefited from the revenues generated during the Inzaghi cycle, is pushing for the coach's confirmation.
⚖️ The alternatives: De Zerbi and Fabregas
In case of a farewell with Inzaghi, the club is thinking of a young profile.
De Zerbi is the favorite of Piero Ausilio, but he has already promised Marseille to stay another year in France.
Fabregas, currently at Como, could instead become the first choice, but the Lombard club is not willing to stand by and the Spanish coach still needs to be convinced to accept the potential offer.
💣 The sensational attempt by Juventus
Juventus, in recent weeks, has conducted a survey with Inzaghi's agent, Tullio Tinti.
Advertisement
According to Tuttosport, then director Cristiano Giuntoli had made contacts to evaluate the possibility of a future agreement, but the attempt stalled after the renewal of the Juventus technical area and the automatic confirmation of Igor Tudor until 2026, following qualification in the Champions League.
However, the confirmation of Juventus' interest in Inzaghi remains, a sign that the Nerazzurri coach is also appreciated outside of Inter.
🏆 Club World Cup incoming
Inter cannot afford further hesitation: in fifteen days the team will be in America to play the Club World Cup.
The debut is set for Tuesday, June 17 at 18 local time, when it will be 3 in the morning on June 18 in Italy, at the Rose Bowl Stadium in Los Angeles against the Mexicans of Monterrey.
Advertisement
This imminent commitment imposes to quickly establish who will lead the team in the next season, whether it will still be Inzaghi or if a new coach will be chosen.
So today will be the day of truth, with no possibility of updates or postponements.
This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇮🇹 here.
📸 NICOLO CAMPO - AFP or licensors
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
24 minutes ago
- Business Insider
I'm an MBA admissions consultant. My international clients are still applying in droves to US schools.
This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Scott Edinburgh, a Boston-based MBA admissions consultant. It has been edited for length and clarity. I launched an admissions consulting business in 2008 — it's a family business that I run with my sister. We get a lot of international students, and they sometimes make up half our clients for the year. Our reach matches what many schools are seeing. There is a lot of interest from India and China, as well as growing numbers in Europe, the Middle East, and some countries in Africa. For MBA programs, most students are in their mid- to late 20s and have some years of work experience. We offer guidance for universities in Europe and some other places, but there are still some unique features about pursuing an MBA in the US. An MBA as a course is more popular in the US than Europe and it opens up more networking opportunities, and the degree holds a bit more value. US programs are also stronger from a recruiting and job standpoint. It also comes down to where you want to establish yourself. If you want to live in the US, there's no better way to do it than to study here. Given the uncertainty surrounding US immigration policies, we've been getting questions about studying and working in the US and seeing some students apply to European schools instead. Still, there are a couple of reasons tons of students are still keen on pursuing an MBA in the US and why I recommend they apply now. Schools are working hard to keep international students I'm getting questions about the US being open to accepting international students and the risks of studying here. There are over 1.1 million international students in the US right now, and they're not all being kicked out and told to leave. There's a lot of hesitation among some international students about their ability to show up on campus. But what we're seeing from talking with deans and councils is that schools are doing a lot so that they can have their international students. These students make up a large percentage of the class at top business schools. Their legal teams are quite strong, and we've seen a lot of court interventions to uphold the rights and opportunities for international students. While it seems like there's an issue now, it's probably going to work itself out. People hesitating means there are fewer applicants, which means you're more likely to get in. You're not entering the job market now People are worried about the job market not being great, and they're reading jobs reports that are coming out from these schools. We tell them you're not applying to apply for a job now. Things are cyclical. If you're applying to business school in 2025 and graduating in 2028, that's three years from now. The chances are that the job market will not be in the same place three years from now. Right now is the absolute best time to apply. This will be the best round in the span of many rounds that I've seen as far as acceptance rates go. The market is not great job-wise wise and you can spend that time educating yourself. You won't be missing out on huge promotions, huge raises, and new jobs. By the time you graduate, things may start to improve. MBAs are time-bound The job market and political situation add an element of risk, but those who are looking to get ahead will find a way to succeed. Students often forget that the MBA is a time-bound program, and waiting too long to apply while the situation clears up might make it too difficult to get in. Universities prefer those in their mid- to late 20s because they are easier to place into jobs and because they want cohorts to mesh well. The median number of years of experience is five, and as you go further down the bell curve, there are just fewer and fewer spots that are available. Unless you are in your early 20s, you could be shooting yourself in the foot by delaying by one or two years. The fear of what might happen from a policy standpoint becomes irrelevant if you don't get into a program in a future year.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rangers appoint former Southampton boss Martin as new head coach
Former Southampton boss Russell Martin is the new man in charge at Rangers (Glyn KIRK) Scottish Premiership club Rangers on Thursday confirmed the appointment of former Southampton boss Russell Martin as their new head coach on a three-year deal. The 39-year-old guided Southampton to promotion to the Premier League last year but was sacked in December following one win from their first 16 games. The club were subsequently relegated. Advertisement Rangers finished last season under the caretaker management of former captain Barry Ferguson, having dismissed Philippe Clement in February. Ex-Scotland defender Martin, who had a short loan spell as a player at Rangers in 2018, faces the daunting task of challenging Celtic, who have just won a 13th Scottish title in 14 seasons. "From my time here, I had a taste of how special this club is, the expectation, the passion and the history," he told the club's website. "Now, as I return, I'm determined to bring success back, for the supporters, the players, and everyone inside this club. Advertisement "There's a lot to be done, but the goal is clear -- win matches, win trophies and give Rangers fans a team that they can be proud of." Martin's arrival is the latest in a series of major changes at the club. An American consortium led by Andrew Cavenagh and 49ers Enterprises secured a majority shareholding on Friday, while new sporting director Kevin Thelwell officially began work on Monday. Rangers chief executive Patrick Stewart, who led the recruitment process alongside Thelwell, said: "Our criteria for our next coach were clear: we wanted a coach who will excel in terms of how we want to play, improve our culture, develop our squad, and ultimately win matches. Russell was the standout candidate." jw/lp
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Commentary: Outrage over Trump's electric vehicle policies is misplaced
Electric car subsidies are heading for the chopping block. A tax bill recently passed by House Republicans is set to stop billions in taxpayer cash from being spent on electric vehicle purchases. If embraced by the Senate and signed into law by President Donald Trump, the bill would gut long-standing government handouts for going electric. The move comes on the heels of another climate policy embraced by Republicans. Earlier this year, Trump announced plans to roll back burdensome rules that effectively force American consumers to buy electric, rather than gas-fueled, cars. The Environmental Protection Agency has called that move the 'biggest deregulatory action in U.S. history.' Not everyone sees it that way. Jason Rylander, legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute, assailed Trump's efforts, noting that his 'administration's ignorance is trumped only by its malice toward the planet.' Other similarly aligned groups have voiced similar sentiments arguing that ending these rules would 'cost consumers more, because clean energy and cleaner cars are cheaper than sticking with the fossil fuels status quo.' Backtracking on EV purchasing mandates seems to have hit Trump haters particularly hard. That mandate — established by President Joe Biden — would have pushed U.S. automakers to sell more EVs. Millions more. Electric cars currently account for 8% of new auto sales. Biden ordered— by presidential fiat — that figure to climb to 35% by 2032. If you believe the hype, the result would be an electric nirvana, one defined by cleaner air and rampant job creation. I'm not convinced. For one thing, cleaner air courtesy of electrification requires that EVs replace gas-powered autos. They're not. In fact, study after study suggests that the purchase of EVs adds to the number of cars in a household. And two-thirds of households with an EV have another non-EV that is driven more — hardly a recipe for climate success given that EVs must be driven (a lot) to deliver climate benefits. Fewer miles driven in an EV also challenges the economic efficiency of the billions Washington spends annually to subsidize their purchase. Claims of job creation thanks to EVs are even more questionable. These claims are predicated around notions of aggressive consumer demand that drives increased EV manufacturing. This in turn creates jobs. A recent Princeton University study noted, 'Announced manufacturing capacity additions and expansions would nearly double U.S. capacity to produce electric vehicles by 2030 and are well sized to meet expected demand for made-in-USA vehicles.' Jobs would be created if there were demand for EVs. Except that's not what's happening. Rather, consumer interest in EVs has effectively cratered. In 2024, 1.3 million EVs were sold in the United States, up from 1.2 million in 2023. This paltry increase is even more worrying given drastic price cuts seen in the EV market in 2024. Tesla knocked thousands of dollars off its best-selling Model 3 and Model Y. Ford followed suit by cutting prices on its Mach-e. So did Volkswagen and Hyundai. Despite deep discounts, consumer interest in electrification remains — to put it mildly — tepid at best. So, when people equate electrification with robust job creation, I'm left wondering what they are going on about. Even if jobs were created, EV advocates are coy about how many of those jobs would benefit existing autoworkers. Would all these workers — currently spread across large swaths of the Midwest — be guaranteed jobs on an EV assembly line? If not, how many workers should expect to receive pink slips? For those who do, will they be able to find new jobs that pay as much as their old ones? Touting job creation for political expediency is one thing. Fully recognizing its impact on hardworking American families today, another. Some Americans may decry Trump's actions on climate, but they have only themselves to blame. Many of the pro-climate policies enacted, particularly during the Biden era, deliver little in the way of climate benefits (or any benefit for that matter) while making a mockery of the real economic concerns businesses and consumers have about climate action. No more. In justifying climate rollbacks, the president says many of his predecessor's policies have hurt rather than helped the American people. He's right and should be commended for doing something about it. ____ Ashley Nunes is a senior research associate at Harvard Law School. ___
