Christmas Eve is the one-year anniversary of Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s partial takeover of Manchester United – but his first 12 months has produce a catalogue of questionable decisions
Sir Jim Ratcliffe marks one year as part-owner of Manchester United today – but it has not proven the cause of celebration most fans imagined on Christmas Eve 12 months ago.
The INEOS arrival, costing £1.05bn for a 25 per cent stake in the club, has not carried the transformative effect initially hoped for at Old Trafford despite an FA Cup final win last May against neighbours Manchester City.
And while Ratcliffe’s vision is still being implemented, many of his big decisions in the opening 12 months have backfired or received sustained backlash.
Here are five of the biggest calls made so far and, really, none of them have had a positive impact.
Ten Hag U-turn
The hierarchy had explored the availability of a number of new head coaches and provisionally decided before the FA Cup final that Ten Hag would be sacked with a new man in place well before pre-season. Then the team produced a really impressive performance to win at Wembley and United decided to do a U-turn and trigger an extension in the Dutchman’s contract.
And that has set them back several months while threatening to make this season a write-off. Ruben Amorim could prove the man who turns things around but without huge sums to spend in the transfer market, after United committed £150m in the summer, he has a squad not perfectly suited to his preferred tactical plan and that could take several windows to remedy.
Had he, or another figure United looked closely at towards the end of last season, been in position six months ago who knows how different things would look now.
Controversial staff cuts
In early July it was confirmed that the club would be making 250 staff members redundant following a cost review that suggested it would lead to a total saving of about £40m.
But various reports have said staff morale hit an all-time low during the process to let so many employees go. And it was then revealed in the club’s latest set of quarterly financial results that they spent £8.6m on severance packages.
A subsequent decision was made to cancel the staff Christmas party, while lunchboxes for workers at Old Trafford were scrapped in favour of a buffet that led to claims (strongly denied by the club) that they were leftovers from corporate guests.
And that is before considering the decision to end Sir Alex Ferguson ’s long-time ambassadorial position.
Ashworth mess
Dan Ashworth spent four months on gardening leave after telling Newcastle he wanted to move to Old Trafford only to last five minutes before INEOS he was not the right fit as sporting director.
The fact Ashworth was not the key figure behind appointing Amorim pointed to a fault line but it is hard to escape the reality that there remain too many chefs in the kitchen.
Working solely at United there is chief executive Omar Berrada, technical director Jason Wilcox and interim director of recruitment Christopher Vivell.
But INEOS then have their own team as part of an unusually complicated federal approach, including Sir Dave Brailsford and Jean-Claude Blanc, with Roger Bell and Rob Nevin also joining the club’s board as part of the INEOS arrival.
Women’s team concern
The Women’s Super League may continue to grow steadily but Ratcliffe, who has at least been transparent, has said the “girls” team is “an opportunity” that is not top priority.
“There’s only so much that you can do and our focus has been on the men’s team. If not, you get spread too thinly,” he told United We Stand recently.
The women’s side were also moved out of their section of the training ground so the men could move in while renovations were taking place.
United sit fourth in the WSL table, seven points behind leaders Chelsea, but with many close to the team puzzled by the mid- and long-term future.
Ticket prices
Fans are now protesting vociferously against a recent decision to raise members’ ticket prices to £66 with United becoming the latest club to scrap concessions.
The 1958 fans’ group, which had led anti-Glazer protests before INEOS’ arrival, said the decision was “clear exploitation of our loyal fanbase.”
Ratcliffe’s view is that Fulham had been charging more and United, being a bigger club, should at least be on par with that – entirely ignoring that large swathes of Manchester and West London have rather different socioeconomic realities.
Join our new WhatsApp community and receive your daily dose of Mirror Football content. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice.
Learn more