The Dutchman has finally got his marching orders, but the long delay has already threatened to derail the Red Devils' season
As anyone who has been in a doomed relationship will be able to tell you, once you have start to have doubts, it's best to end it there and then. And that is what Manchester United should have done with Erik ten Hag. Instead, they stalled on the biggest decision affecting the club until they were left with no choice after the infuriating defeat by West Ham. Rather than sacking the Dutchman in May after he had presided over the team's worst season in Premier League history, they decided to wait until Monday, leaving them scrambling around to find a permanent successor before the crunch Premier League game against Chelsea on Sunday.
There were numerous points last season when, in any other circumstances, the manager would have been sacked. Like in September 2023, when United were beaten at home by Brighton and then Crystal Palace. Or in October, after successive 3-0 home defeats by Manchester City and Newcastle. Or perhaps in December, when they were humiliated 3-0 by Bournemouth and exited the Champions League at the group stage.
Circumstances were on Ten Hag's side in each of those occasions, though, as the club was in ownership limbo while Sir Jim Ratcliffe negotiated the purchase of his minority stake, which was announced on Christmas Eve and then fully approved in February. United's results slowly picked up at that point, but they unravelled again towards the end of the season, culminating in the crushing 4-0 defeat by Crystal Palace.
That was when Ratcliffe and his INEOS colleagues began to seriously consider changing manager, reaching out to Kieran McKenna, Thomas Frank and Thomas Tuchel. But, influenced by United's shock FA Cup final win over Manchester City, they bottled it, giving Ten Hag another opportunity to put things right and triggering the one-year extension in his contract.
Not wanting to admit to their mistake was clearly a big factor in United's hierarchy showing more patience with Ten Hag after the dreadful 3-0 defeats at home to Liverpool and then to Tottenham to start the current campaign. The conclusion they have since come to is the right one, and you could say it's better late than never. But they have paid a heavy price for their indecision.
AFPThrowing £7m away
United's dithering has already cost them a hefty amount in extra compensation to Ten Hag compared to if they had parted ways with him in the summer. It was reported last May that sacking the Dutchman, who had one year left on his contract at the time, would have cost around £10 million (£13m). Triggering the one-year extension and giving him a contract until June 2026, therefore, would likely raise that figure to around £17m ($22m). And that is before you consider the amount if will cost to hire a new manager, especially one who is already employed elsewhere.
United have effectively thrown away £7m ($9m) by stalling for four months on a decision that they should have taken over the summer. That might not seem like a lot given United made £662m ($860m) in revenue according to their last accounts, but it is a considerable amount in the context of the brutal cost-cutting regime Ratcliffe has implemented since taking the reins of the club's football operation.
The billionaire has made 250 members of staff redundant and even cut ties with Sir Alex Ferguson, the club's greatest manager of all time and the reason why United are the global phenomenon they are today. The £7m they have parted with by giving Ten Hag that short-lived new contract could have paid the salaries of scores of those loyal employees. It also eats up a sizeable portion of the £30m ($39m) the club said it would save over two years by making those redundancies.
AdvertisementGetty £95m on Ten Hag choices
The £7m, however, pales in comparison to the amount of money United spent last summer on players that Ten Hag clearly pushed to sign. The club shelled out £178m ($231m) in the last transfer window on five new players, and while Manuel Ugarte and Leny Yoro appear to have been chosen by sporting director Dan Ashworth, it is reasonable to suggest that the manager asked to sign Noussair Mazraoui and Matthjis de Ligt, who both played under him at Ajax, as well as his fellow Dutchman Joshua Zirkzee. The trio cost a combined £95m ($123m).
Zirkzee has scored just one goal since his £36m ($46m) move from Bologna, and although he set up Casemiro's goal against West Ham on Sunday, he has often looked clumsy and slow when he has played. De Ligt and Mazraoui, meanwhile, have been inconsistent, and it is hard to imagine that they would have been signed had a different manager been in place over the summer.
The former Ajax duo's arrival meant that United spent £250m ($324m) on players Ten Hag had previously worked with at the Amsterdam giants. Only Andre Onana (admittedly after a very tough start) and Lisandro Martinez have been successes, with Antony looking like one of the worst signings in Premier League history.
AFPLetting top candidates slip away
United's dilly-dallying over Ten Hag has also left them with fewer obvious successors than if they had pulled the trigger in June. Mauricio Pochettino, who was greatly admired by Ferguson and was Ten Hag's main rival for the Old Trafford dugout in 2022, is now the manager of the United States. Tuchel, who held advanced talks with the club over the summer, is now the England head coach. Roberto De Zerbi was on the market over the summer but has since taken charge of Marseille.
Julian Nagelsmann is also out of the question after renewing his contract with Germany back in April, when United should have been making contingency plans for Ten Hag's successor. Xavi Hernandez has effectively ruled himself out of the running for the now vacant job as he does not want to take on a new role until next season. Gareth Southgate also recently said he wants to take an extended break from management after leaving the England job in the summer.
Graham Potter and Edin Terzic lead a now uninspiring list of managers who are currently out of work and could realistically get the job. Prising a highly-rated manager who is currently employed, such as Ruben Amorim or Thomas Frank, will be much harder to pull off at this stage of the season as their clubs would find it much harder to find a replacement and would therefore charge far more in compensation.
Getty Serious questions
Sacking Ten Hag four months into the season rather than last June looks all the more remarkable given that United made high-profile executive appointments just weeks after they had decided to stick with the manager. Omar Berrada began work as the club's new chief executive in July, around the same time that Ashworth started as sporting director.
Ashworth and Berrada sought to distance themselves from the call to keep Ten Hag when they spoke to the media before the Liverpool game in September as they were still on gardening leave from their previous roles at Manchester City and Newcastle, respectively. Berrada said: "In terms of the contract, that was a decision that was taken prior to both of our arrivals. But we’re very happy with that decision. Erik has our full backing and we have worked very closely together in this transfer window. We’re going to continue working very closely with him to help him get the best results out of the team."
The pair's words ring hollow now after they chose to sack Ten Hag, and the unusual timing of their arrival begs the question: why could Ratcliffe and INEOS director Sir Dave Brailsford not have delayed the decision on the Dutchman until they began work? And why did they deem it necessary to extend Ten Hag's contract when he had another year left anyway?