Manchester United manager Michael Carrick has acknowledged a lack of direct communication from Sir Jim Ratcliffe following the Ineos chairman’s controversial remarks about immigration, but emphasized the team’s unity and focus on performance. The comments, made during a Sky News interview on , sparked widespread criticism, prompting a subsequent apology from Ratcliffe if his “choice of language has offended some people in the UK and Europe.”
Carrick revealed he last saw Ratcliffe after the match against Arsenal on and has received neither an apology nor any further explanation regarding the initial statement. “Last time I saw Jim was Arsenal and I’m fine with that,” Carrick stated on Friday. “I don’t think there’s anything, in terms of constant communication from above, [for] my role that I need.”
The controversy centers on Ratcliffe’s assertion that the United Kingdom had been “colonised by immigrants.” While Ratcliffe later expressed regret for any offense caused, the initial comments drew condemnation from political figures, including Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who labelled them “offensive.” Manchester United itself issued a statement affirming its commitment to inclusivity and welcoming diversity, though it did not directly address Ratcliffe’s remarks.
Carrick, however, downplayed the potential for disruption within the club, stressing the strong team spirit and shared purpose. “We’re definitely all pulling together,” he said. “Being around here and being in and around stadiums in the last few weeks, it’s clear [we are] pulling together, pretty strong as a group.”
The situation highlights the delicate balance Ratcliffe faces as he integrates into the ownership structure of one of the world’s most globally recognized football clubs. His appointment as head of football policy has been met with both optimism and scrutiny, and this incident underscores the importance of navigating cultural sensitivities and maintaining a cohesive environment within the team.
Carrick’s response reflects a deliberate effort to shield the squad from external distractions and maintain a focus on on-field performance. He emphasized that his primary responsibility lies in fostering a positive and productive atmosphere within the team, rather than engaging in public discourse about ownership matters. “My role is to create the environment within the group and lead in terms of the first team and beyond that,” he explained. “I’m sitting here now and the supporters listening in, that’s part of my role, but I don’t necessarily need it from above to be constant.”
Beyond the immediate fallout from Ratcliffe’s comments, Carrick also spoke about his commitment to developing young talent and maintaining the club’s historical traditions. He highlighted the importance of connecting the first team with the academy system, drawing on his own experiences as a young player at West Ham United.
“It has a little bit to do with my upbringing,” Carrick said, recalling how then-West Ham manager Harry Redknapp and assistant Frank Lampard Sr. Would regularly attend youth team matches. “A big part was pathways to the first team and a connection with the first team. One of my big experiences was playing in the youth cup… Frank Lampard snr came and watched. That is something all those years ago I still remember.”
Carrick’s emphasis on youth development and club traditions aligns with the legacy established by Sir Alex Ferguson during his long and successful tenure as Manchester United manager. By prioritizing these values, Carrick appears to be attempting to build a sustainable foundation for future success, independent of any off-field controversies.
The team faces Everton on Monday night, a crucial match as they strive to end their Champions League exile. Carrick’s focus remains firmly on preparing the squad for this challenge, and he has sought to minimize the impact of the recent off-field events on the team’s preparations. The incident serves as a reminder of the complexities inherent in modern football ownership and the importance of maintaining a clear separation between business interests and the core values of the club.
The lack of direct apology or explanation from Ratcliffe to the squad, as reported by Carrick, may raise questions about the level of engagement and sensitivity expected from the new ownership structure. However, Carrick’s measured response and emphasis on team unity suggest a determination to move forward and focus on achieving success on the pitch. The coming weeks will be crucial in determining whether Ratcliffe can successfully integrate into the club and build a positive relationship with the players and staff.
