Michael Carrick will remain in charge of Manchester United for Saturday’s trip to Chelsea, with the club choosing to give him and his players a chance to turn around a crisis that followed a 4-1 defeat at Como and a loss to Bournemouth at Old Trafford.
When Carrick disappeared down the tunnel after the Bournemouth defeat on Sunday, the support that fans had shown a legendary former player turned to hostility and anger at the current squad. The atmosphere was said to be 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, on what had been a foul day weather-wise and an awful one on the pitch.
Asked at his post-match news conference whether he expected to be in charge for the Chelsea game, Carrick said: “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. No timescale has been put on the club’s decision, but Carrick will lead his side into Stamford Bridge with United 16th in the table.
United then face a crucial Champions League match against Roma three days later, followed by a Premier League game against in-form Aston Villa and a two-week international break. No one at the club has said so publicly, but that break would be the most obvious time to decide whether a change of coach is needed.
Waiting for a decision that never came
On Monday morning, when many expected an announcement ending Carrick’s tenure, a senior figure at United said calmness and a clear head would be needed to navigate the turbulence around Old Trafford.
Carrick had already been treading water since the crushing 4-1 defeat at Como on 21 October, one of the worst European nights in the club’s history. Respected fan Andy Mitten, editor of the United We Stand fanzine, described that performance as “an affront to the name of Manchester United”.
Captain Bruno Fernandes publicly questioned Carrick’s tactics and the inability of the coaching staff 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 technical director Jason Wilcox, said he wanted “more from our technical director”. The picture was of a squad out of control, which posed an immediate dilemma for the United hierarchy.
Believing it would look reactionary and impulsive to remove Carrick over the negativity surrounding one game, United stuck with the 45-year-old for the Bournemouth match. That game turned sour, with a performance that many felt was worse than the one in Italy.
Fernandes was left out of the starting lineup and dropped to the bench. Afterwards, the Portugal star liked an Instagram post with the caption: “Never push a loyal person to the point where they no longer care”.
Late on Sunday night, the decision on Carrick’s future had not been made, and the judgement was expected to stretch into Monday. It did not. The players who started against Bournemouth were given the day off, but Fernandes and Carrick were both at Carrington. Fernandes was having pre-planned treatment, while Carrick watched a closed-doors Under-21s game.
Chief executive Omar Berrada and Wilcox were also at the training ground, discussing what the club’s 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 seen as not entirely Carrick’s fault. Senior figures at the club feel the players, a squad they believe is capable of qualifying for the Champions League, are underperforming badly and should share some of the blame.
There appears to be a general desire to help 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 revealed what conversations, if any, have taken place between the captain and his manager.
It is far 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.”
Cynics may argue the main reason Carrick is still in a job is that the club could not secure a replacement before the Chelsea game. Some of the coaches who helped him during his spell as interim manager in January, including Under-18s boss Darren Fletcher, are now part of the senior set-up.
Eddie Howe and Julian Nagelsmann were among the options United explored as they weighed whether to make a change. Appointing Howe would trigger a multi-million pound compensation payment to 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 hiring and firing coaches.
Former Chelsea boss Antonio Conte is reportedly willing to discuss 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 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 taking charge of football affairs in early 2024, as well as injecting £300m of his own money into the club.
Disgruntled fans may point to clubs such as Brentford and Brighton as proof that good players can be signed without paying astronomical fees. However, options for bigger clubs such as United were said to be scarce during the summer window.
It has never been explained why the club chose to focus on bolstering the midfield last summer rather than address clear personnel issues at left-back and centre-forward. Injuries to Luke Shaw and Benjamin Sesko have made those problems 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, though, attention is fixed on Stamford Bridge, where Carrick is due to speak to the media on Thursday.