Sir Jim Ratcliffe blindsided Ten Hag in very first meeting as Man Utd owner, no going back

**Begin as you mean to go along, as they say, and for Erik ten Hag, the ending was written at the beginning of his working relationship with Sir Jim Ratcliffe. **

It is an open secret by now that Erik ten Hag had become an uncomfortable decision for Ineos since he wasn’t a manager they hired, but firing him wasn’t so easy.

So, they waited until it became easy, and there was always an unannounced truce between them that left an uneasy feeling around the club.

Ten Hag has now revealed that the uneasy relationship started from the very first meeting and snowballed from there.

Erik ten Hag recalls poor first meeting with Sir Jim Ratcliffe

Ineos hadn’t made a good impression at Carrington with their first steps, embarking on a mission to cut jobs with their corporate-speak, and not following it up with results since.

As it turns out, that corporate-speak extended to the manager as well, with Ten Hag saying that he and Ratcliffe started off on the wrong foot.

The “head coach vs manager” debate was strong at Old Trafford this time as Ineos sought to modernise the club’s structure with a top-down philosophy.

Ten Hag was the manager, but they wanted him to be a head coach, resulting in the first uncomfortable conversation.

Speaking to The Athletic, Ten Hag revealed that he was open to modifying his contract to placate Ineos, and wasn’t keen on unilateral power anyway, but Ineos’ communication was completely off.

He said: “But after the first meeting (at Carrington), he started talking about the structure in the football club, how the manager should be head coach. I said, ‘OK, let’s discuss, but my contract is different’. I never heard anything.

“Then every press conference (at United), they ask me if the structure should be changed. I always want to cooperate in a club — you can’t do this on your own. You need to find a strategy about philosophy, game model, about team profile, individual profiles. That is what I was used to, but with them there was no communication.”

This speaks of an ownership that didn’t have the confidence to sack Ten Hag, so they used these underhanded means to push him out.

Seeking clarity and communication is also what Ruben Amorim and Lisandro Martinez have said since Ten Hag’s departure, so this is clearly not a Ten Hag issue.

Perhaps Ineos simply aren’t what they promised to be. It was easy to be better than the Glazers. It’s much harder to be competent football club owners.