Man Utd make a mockery of their own job cuts as latest target lined up for huge cash

So, by the time INEOS chief Sir Jim Ratcliffe completed his minority stake purchase in Manchester United last February, fans were already well braced for change. After 11 years of confusion, complacency and stark contradiction at Old Trafford, here was a businessman who promised stability as well as success.

Thus far, Ratcliffe’s reign as seemingly been signified by a ruthlessness that has forbidden any club employee from getting comfortable in their seat, not least Erik ten Hag despite what seems his extended stay of execution.

From immediate job cuts, to downsizing packages for VIP guests and now even reports of cancelling proposed Christmas parties, on the one hand Ratcliffe appears hell-bent on ending the culture of financial recklessness at a club left craving the dominance it once lauded under Sir Alex Ferguson.

Indeed, it is the club’s greatest ever manager currently central to Ratcliffe’s latest divisive decision. After Ferguson stepped down in 2013, the majority safely assumed he would have a place for life at the club he made his own.

Even the 82-year-old has not been immune to the cost-cutting though. His £2million-a-year ambassadorial role will be culled ay the end of the 2024/25 campaign, a call pilloried by the players who once prospered under him – with Eric Cantona one former Red Devil to publicly voice his disgust.

In reality, Ferguson’s influence from afar has long failed to inspire the current generation. And in an era where costs are rising and Profit and Sustainability Rules, for all their inconsistencies, have tightened budgets, perhaps Ratcliffe can be forgiven for letting his head overrule his heart to ensure financial stability.

Except for this notion. The apparent penny pinching off the field is wildly at odds with what continues to be erratic spending for personnel on it. As Ferguson joins the likes of club shop workers, kitchen porters, and programme sellers in being released, Sky Sports are reporting that United are preparing to offer extortionate wages to bring Alphonso Davies to the club in 2025.

The Bayern Munich left-back is out of contract at the end of the season, and has also been widely linked with Real Madrid. And yet, improving his current £181,000-a-week deal seemingly isn’t an issue for Ratcliffe now he’s scrapped a festive bash or two.

Indeed, the pragmatism behind the scenes was undermined this summer by a continuation of the now customary muddled transfer policy. Matthijs de Ligt and Manuel Ugarte arrived for a combined £80m fee, continuing United’s Glazer-instilled tradition of prioritising big name players at prestigious clubs, irrespective of form or suitability.

Leny Yoro and Joshua Zirkzee added a further £87million to the summer bills. Both admittedly were purchased on potential and may yet come good. Both also represent a huge financial gamble given that said potential remains largely unproven.

Indeed, sanctioning the spending has left United’s powers that be between a rock and a hard place, or at least one harder than the leaking roof that currently plagues their stadium. To allow a manger to spend a much almost makes it a prerequisite to give him a time to adapt a squad – despite widespread belief that squad isn’t adapting to anything anytime soon.

So Ratcliffe removing Ferguson, and others, is perhaps not the heinous disrespected to club history and culture that many supporter will deem it to be. But if the club continues to underperform, and the lavish transfer fees don’t soon yield Premier League results, his authoritarian act will soon become laughable.