In the nine and a half months since Sir Jim Ratcliffe took a major stake in Manchester United, the club has experienced a series of costly decisions that have raised questions about his leadership. Ratcliffe, who invested £1.25 billion into the club, has often projected an image of a shrewd businessman, but his actions have cast doubt on that perception. Early on, Ratcliffe threw his support behind manager Erik ten Hag by offering him a new contract. However, just a few months later, Ratcliffe sacked him at great expense, signaling a lack of commitment and stability.
After parting ways with Ten Hag, Ratcliffe moved quickly to appoint Ruben Amorim, a manager with a promising reputation, and assembled a coaching staff, further increasing costs. Yet despite these changes, the team has continued to perform poorly, leading to increasing frustration among fans. The decision-making process behind these managerial shifts raises questions about whether Ratcliffe truly has the club’s long-term success at heart or whether his approach is rooted in a series of knee-jerk reactions.
Ratcliffe’s leadership has also been marked by cost-cutting measures that have not been well-received by the club’s supporters. In an attempt to balance the financial books, he made significant staff reductions, laying off 250 employees and scaling back support for the women’s team. In addition, Ratcliffe took the drastic step of raising ticket prices in the middle of the season, a move that alienated many fans. While these actions may have been intended to improve the club’s finances, they have painted Ratcliffe as out of touch with the loyal supporters who have long been the backbone of Manchester United.
Despite his public persona as a self-made billionaire who understands the struggles of ordinary people, Ratcliffe’s decisions seem to show little regard for the working-class supporters who have stood by the club through thick and thin. The club’s history is built on a foundation of passion and loyalty from its fanbase, but Ratcliffe’s actions appear to prioritize financial concerns over the experience of those who fill the stands at Old Trafford week in and week out.
This sense of disconnection is compounded by the involvement of Dave Brailsford, a figure known for his success in cycling but with little experience in football. Brailsford’s role at Manchester United has raised eyebrows, especially given the current state of the team. Under his guidance, United has endured its worst start to a league season in nearly 40 years. Despite his background in high-performance sports, which earned him acclaim for his management of Team Sky in cycling, Brailsford has struggled to translate those skills to football. His presence, along with Ratcliffe’s high-profile investments, seems to be doing little to reverse United’s fortunes, leading to increasing concern over the club’s future direction.
Ratcliffe’s decisions have been a series of short-term fixes that fail to address the root causes of Manchester United’s decline. His move to hire Dan Ashworth as the club’s head of football recruitment initially seemed promising, but just five months later, Ashworth was dismissed. The decision to part ways with Ashworth after such a brief tenure only further highlights the instability at the club. Ratcliffe had been quick to praise Ashworth upon his arrival, but his swift removal is another example of the inconsistency that has characterized the current regime.
The constant upheaval at the top of the club is mirrored by the performance on the field. The team’s poor results suggest that the managerial changes and costly decisions made by Ratcliffe and his team have not had the desired effect. The club has struggled to regain its former glory since the departure of Sir Alex Ferguson, and it appears that Ratcliffe’s leadership has failed to provide the stability necessary to achieve success in the modern football landscape.
In a time when the club needs a strong, unifying figure to restore Manchester United to its place among Europe’s elite, Ratcliffe’s approach has created an environment of uncertainty. His decisions, while often financially motivated, have not led to the necessary improvements on the pitch or in the club’s long-term prospects. The sense of drift is palpable, and fans are increasingly questioning whether Ratcliffe is the right person to oversee the club’s future.
Manchester United has a rich history of success, but that legacy is at risk as the club grapples with its current struggles. The leadership under Ratcliffe, marked by frequent changes, poor decisions, and a lack of stability, has raised serious doubts about the club’s ability to return to its former heights. With the team languishing in mid-table and no clear sense of direction from the boardroom, the question remains whether Ratcliffe can turn things around or whether his costly decisions will continue to hinder the club’s recovery. For the sake of Manchester United’s future, the club needs more than just financial backing it needs a clear vision and steady leadership that can restore its place among football’s elite.
