Michael Carrick will remain in charge of Manchester United for Saturday’s trip to Chelsea, despite a growing backlash from fans after the defeat by Bournemouth at Old Trafford on Sunday. United have not set a timescale for turning the situation around, and the club sits 16th in the table.
When Carrick left the pitch after the loss, the support he had received from supporters for a legendary former player turned to hostility and anger aimed at the current squad. The atmosphere afterwards was described as emotional. Carrick was the last to leave the stadium and, as usual, patiently posed for selfies and signed shirts for the fans who stayed behind, despite a foul day in the weather and an awful performance on the pitch.
Asked at his post-match news conference whether he expected to be in charge for the Chelsea game, Carrick replied: “I’m not expecting anything in particular, to be honest. I’m carrying on as normal.”
Few believed that was sustainable, and even Carrick’s coaching team wondered whether they would survive.
A decision that never came
United have decided that Carrick and his players will have the chance to turn things around. No timescale has been put on that, but the next few fixtures are crucial. Carrick faces Chelsea on Saturday, then a vital Champions League match against Roma three days later, followed by a Premier League game against in-form Aston Villa before a two-week international break. That break is widely seen as the most obvious point to decide whether a change of coach is needed, although no-one at the club has said so publicly.
On Monday morning, many expected an announcement ending Carrick’s tenure. A senior figure at United instead said that calmness and a clear head would be needed to navigate the turbulence around Old Trafford.
Carrick had already been under pressure since the crushing 4-1 defeat at Como on 21 October, one of the worst European nights in the club’s history. Respected United fan Andy Mitten, editor of the United We Stand fanzine, who interviewed chief executive Omar Berrada on behalf of the club last June, described the performance as “an affront to the name of Manchester United”.
The fallout deepened when captain Bruno Fernandes publicly questioned Carrick’s tactics and the inability of his coaches to spot what was going wrong. A week earlier, defender Lisandro Martinez had said he expected more investment in the squad and, turning his attention to Jason Wilcox, “more from our technical director”. Together, the comments painted a picture of a squad out of control and posed an immediate dilemma for the United hierarchy.
Feeling it would look reactionary and impulsive to remove Carrick after the negativity of one game, United stuck with the 45-year-old for the Bournemouth match. That decision backfired, as the performance was arguably worse than the one in Italy. Fernandes was dropped to the bench, and afterwards he liked an Instagram post with the caption: “Never push a loyal person to the point where they no longer care”.
Late on Sunday night, it was understood that a final decision to sack Carrick had not been made and that the judgement would stretch into Monday. There was no decision then either. The players who started against Bournemouth were given the day off, but Fernandes and Carrick were both at Carrington. Fernandes had pre-planned treatment, while Carrick watched a closed-doors Under-21s game. Berrada and Wilcox were also at the training ground, discussing what the immediate future should look like. Sources say it is inconceivable that minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe and the Glazer family were not part of those discussions.
It was early evening before it became clear there would be no update on Carrick’s future. He arrived at Carrington at 07:30 GMT on Tuesday and took training as normal. Along with Fernandes and several other players, he signed autographs and posed for photographs with a group of fans invited to the training ground that day. Four hours later, United sources confirmed he would be in charge at Stamford Bridge.
“We all want to put it right”
The current predicament is not seen as entirely Carrick’s fault. Senior figures at the club believe the players, a squad they think is capable of qualifying for the Champions League, are underperforming badly and should share some of the blame.
There does appear to be a general desire to support Carrick. One player said: “The feeling is that we all want to put it right. Players, staff, everyone.”
It is not known whether the “we” includes Fernandes, and it has not been established what, if any, conversations have taken place between the captain and his manager.
It is easier to replace one manager and his backroom team than an entire squad of players, and if results do not improve, Carrick will pay the price. One former senior United official said: “Ordinarily, Michael would have gone. The last two performances were unacceptable and team discipline is broken. Not doing it is fascinating and risky.”
Some cynics argue that Carrick remains in his job largely because United have been unable to secure a replacement before the Chelsea game. Some of the coaches that Darren Fletcher, now the Under-18s boss, called on to help during his spell as interim manager in January are now part of the senior set-up.
Eddie Howe and Julian Nagelsmann were among the options explored as United weighed up a change. Any move to appoint Howe would trigger a multi-million pound compensation payment from his former club Newcastle, and some observers believe such payments may be a factor in United’s reluctance to act, given the sums previously spent on hiring and firing coaches.
Former Chelsea boss Antonio Conte is understood to be willing to have a conversation about the job, although there has been no direct contact. Howe, Nagelsmann and Conte are all currently out of work, as is Kieran McKenna, who worked with Carrick as part of Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s coaching team at United before leaving for Ipswich. Aston Villa’s Unai Emery also has strong backing at United, but the club are realistic about their chances of tempting the Spaniard away from Villa Park.
What about Berrada and Wilcox?
Wilcox’s future has also come under intense scrutiny. One source close to United believes it is inevitable that the former Blackburn and Leeds player will eventually lose his job if a third managerial change in as many seasons is made.
There is sympathy for Wilcox, who did not set the summer transfer budget. Others point out that Ratcliffe has provided significant funds for transfers since he took charge of football affairs in early 2024, as well as injecting £300m of his own money into the club. While fans may point to clubs such as Brentford and Brighton as proof that good players can be signed without astronomical fees, options for bigger clubs such as United were said to be scarce in the summer window.
Nevertheless, it has never been explained why the club chose to focus on bolstering the midfield last summer rather than addressing clear problems at left-back and centre-forward. Injuries to Luke Shaw and Benjamin Sesko have made that issue even more acute.
Another senior figure in the game believes both Wilcox and Berrada may be vulnerable, suggesting Ratcliffe could be considering a wider overhaul of senior staff.
For now, attention is focused on Stamford Bridge, and Carrick is due to speak to the media on Thursday.