Cliff Notes – Ratcliffe needs to invest in Man United women and show he cares
- Manchester United’s 3-0 loss to Chelsea in the FA Cup final highlights a growing gap in investment and performance between the two clubs, with United failing to secure any trophies this season.
- Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s absence during the final and previous matches raises concerns about his commitment to the women’s team, particularly amid criticism of his management decisions.
- Manager Marc Skinner emphasises the need for increased investment in the women’s squad to compete effectively, indicating that Ratcliffe’s involvement is crucial for future success.
Ratcliffe needs to invest in Man United women and show he cares
LONDON — Manchester United were unable to retain the FA Cup trophy after a feeble 3-0 loss to Chelsea, who defeated them three years ago in their first Wembley appearance, consigned them to a trophyless season. And, once again, minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe (who acquired a 27.7% stake in the club and took over control of football operations earlier this year) was absent from the occasion.
While upsetting Chelsea — who had already claimed the WSL title with an unbeaten season, alongside the League Cup — was always going to be an uphill task, United never really got going and when Celin Bizet’s sloppy foul on Erin Cuthbert gifted the Blues a 45th-minute penalty, which was converted by Sandy Baltimore, it sapped all the energy out of the side.
In the second half, rather than pushing harder, United allowed Chelsea to get comfortable and there was no coming back from that. Chelsea exploited gaps in United’s shaky defence and capitalised on their lack of clinical ability in the final third as Catarina Macario’s 84th-minute header and Baltimore’s second in stoppage time put some gloss on the scoreline. But the chasm between the two clubs was clear from the start.
‘More investment into Chelsea WFC’
Chelsea, who have spent heavily on coach Sonia Bompastor’s squad to create a treble-winning team — Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian invested a reported £20 million in the women’s team this week alone — registered 12 shots, with seven on target; United mustered less than half of those (five), with two on target.
And while Chelsea had co-owners Behdad Eghbali and Todd Boehly, director Barbara Charone, and co-sporting directors Paul Winstanley and Laurence Stewart — as well as new investor Ohanian and his wife, tennis star Serena Williams — in the stands, United’s only boardroom representation came in the form of co-chairman Avie Glazer, chief executive Omar Berrada and technical director Jason Wilcox.
Amid criticism over his lack of care for the women’s team, the absence of INEOS chief Ratcliffe was telling. And it is not the first time. A year ago, the 72-year-old opted to attend the United men’s Premier League clash with Arsenal instead of watching the women’s side win the club’s first major trophy vs. Tottenham. Shortly afterward, he gave an interview to Bloomberg claiming plans for the women’s team were yet to be confirmed and later claimed the criticism was “a bit unfair.”
After more vitriol following the decision to move female players out of their bespoke building at Carrington to accommodate the men’s team while the training ground undergoes a £50m revamp, Ratcliffe’s repeat actions again this year only serve to further undermine the “one-club mentality” United have tried to foster since their women’s team was re-established in 2018.
‘Sir Jim a no-show once again’
Avram Glazer, Omar Berrada, Jason Wilcox, and former CEO David Gill were in attendance, but not Sir Jim Ratcliffe.
“In all honesty, I don’t know why Sir Jim wasn’t here,” United manager Marc Skinner said after the cup final. “Those are the people [Glazer, Berrada and Wilcox] I deal with every day, so that’s the people I need to be here. They need to see that for us to be able to look at what we need to do to close a growing gap in finance that Chelsea have.”
Skinner added that as long as the “club continue to invest in the right way” they’re showing their support, but the fact that he doesn’t deal with Ratcliffe is reflective of the separation between the owner and the women’s team.
While reaching the FA Cup final for a third year running and securing a top-three finish in the WSL for the second time in three years added a positive element to this season, United’s campaign as a whole fell short of where they would have wanted to be. Yes, they reclaimed a place in Europe, but it was not easy and they will need to battle through two rounds of qualifying (starting in August) after their 4-3 loss to Arsenal on the final day saw them miss out on second place.
Following last season’s dismal fifth-place finish, there has arguably been growth. Indeed, there was optimism ahead of the FA Cup final that, due to two narrow 1-0 defeats against the Blues in the league, United were closing the gap and could cause an upset. But now the dust has settled, it feels greater than ever.
There are plenty of reasons why United could not beat Chelsea this season. The Blues are born winners, they have had heavy investment into the team, and have double the amount of time in the WSL. But United can’t blame their issues on Chelsea spending more and winning as a result if they’re not willing to do the same. At some point, the club need to start investing in the women’s side properly to be able to find the answer. And that has to start at the top: with Ratcliffe and INEOS.
“The reality is that it’s the investment in the team that needs to happen,” Skinner said. “As long as our club and team are being invested in, that is also a way of showing your support for the team.”
So if Ratcliffe wants to show he cares about the women’s team, he needs to show them the money. The club’s transfer budget this summer will be indicative of whether United can push on to challenge Chelsea and stake a claim in Europe, or whether they will continue to stagnate due to a lack of attention.
