Sir Jim Ratcliffe's comments go beyond reputational damage for Man Utd

It took 23 hours but Manchester United did distance themselves from Sir Jim Ratcliffe's rhetoric on immigration.

Without naming the part-owner, a statement insisting they "remain deeply committed" to "equality, diversity and inclusion" was effectively a public rebuke.

Remember, Sir Jim only owns just under 30% of the club, despite the investment gaining control of football operations two years ago and the INEOS billionaire becoming the face of decision-making.

The majority owners are still the six Glazer siblings, whose grandparents were Lithuanian Jewish immigrants to the United States.

We haven't heard from them directly, but the statement issued on the club website is as close as we can get to detecting their view of Sir Jim's complaint in a Sky News interview that "the UK has been colonised by immigrants".

United highlighted how Manchester is a city "anyone can call home", extolling how the club boasts a "diverse group of players, staff and global community of supporters".

Sir Jim's own apology statement made no mention of diversity and inclusion.

Only 20 words were spent apologising - "I am sorry that my choice of language has offended some people in the UK and Europe and caused concern" - another 90 words were used to reassert the need for curbs on immigration.

That is a concern shared by three leading parties - Reform, Labour and the Conservatives - but it is demonising immigrants, claiming they have colonised the country, that has proved so inflammatory.

We don't know if Manchester mayor Andy Burnham has accepted Sir Jim's apology - and how it impacts their work on the Old Trafford redevelopment project - but the day began with him denouncing "portraying those who come here as a hostile invading force".

Sir Jim could yet face an FA charge for bringing the game into disrepute as the governing body looks into his outburst and whether the language was discriminatory.

While the bulk of the interview focused on business and economic interests, Sir Jim did bring it back to his football role when expressing concerns about the levels of immigration.

"I've been very unpopular at Manchester United because we've made lots of changes," he said, adding: "You've got all the same issues with the country. If you really want to deal with the major issues of immigration."

Piara Powar, executive director of the FARE network, told Sky News that Sir Jim's language risks "escalating hate".

The leading football anti-racism activist told Sky News: "He's now using his platform as a co-owner of Manchester United to put that out there, and that's a very dangerous precedent.

"So if the FA don't look at it very seriously... that then leads us into a dangerous road with owners using the purchase of football clubs as a political platform."

And what about the fans, particularly those from diverse communities, who can fear discrimination still at matches?

Manchester United Muslim Supporters' Club chair Asif Mahmud is concerned about those threatening minority communities now feeling more empowered.

He asked: "Will comments like what Sir Jim has said give power and strength to those who feel we don't belong here?"

For Preetam Singh of the Stretford Sikhs fans' group, Sir Jim still has more work to do demonstrating any contrition.

He said: "It was a very half-hearted apology, more of a justification of what he said yesterday. So I would expect, and I would hope, he and the club would maybe come out and make a statement with a proper apology."

Read more from Sky News:
Parents speak as ex-nursery worker jailed for sex abuse
Brain chips reach 'tipping point', says leading scientist

Fans are still waiting. And this goes beyond reputational damage for Manchester United.

It is about how welcome players, wider staff and fans from all backgrounds feel at the club now, knowing the true views of a leader inside Old Trafford can seem so dehumanising.

(c) Sky News 2026: Sir Jim Ratcliffe's comments go beyond reputational damage for Man Utd