Would Bayern Munich have backed a manager that lost six out of their final nine league matches last season? Or even Borussia Dortmund? And would Juventus, Inter or AC Milan have stuck with a coach that had presided over the club's first ever defeat to a fourth-tier team and then lost three of their six league games, including being humiliated by their local rivals? The answer is obvious: no.
Now let's move the conversation on from the owners. Would the supporters of any of those elite European teams refrain from demanding such a struggling manager be dismissed? Clearly not. And would they be chanting his name at each game or holding up supportive banners for him at home and away matches? No chance. They would be much more likely to boycott games by way of protest or even invade the training ground to confront the coach and his players.
That United fans are still supporting the manager, at games at least, has a lot to do with the legacy of having Sir Alex Ferguson in charge for 27 seasons and a lack of appetite for a never-ending churn of managers. When Ferguson ended his glorious reign in 2013, he urged the Old Trafford faithful to "stand by the new manager" and that is largely what they have done, from David Moyes' nightmare tenure through to the metronomic football of Louis van Gaal, Jose Mourinho's mood swings and the many thrashings Ole Gunnar Solskjaer and Erik ten Hag oversaw.
But why is Sir Jim Ratcliffe, a man who had no qualms about sacking 450 workers and gleefully took away employees' free lunches, keeping the faith? GOAL tries to explain the conundrum facing the United co-owner...








