Dan Ashworth was sacked by Manchester United just months after being named sporting director and weeks after Ruben Amorim was appointed manager following Erik ten Hag’s sacking
The two candidates that sacked Manchester United sporting director Dan Ashworth wanted to replace Erik ten Hag have been revealed.
Ten Hag was sacked in October following a poor start to the season, after United had offered the Dutchman a new contract just months before. United promptly continued their search for a new manager, having already started scouting potential replacements over the summer.
Ex-Newcastle and FA chief Ashworth played a crucial role in extending the Dutchman’s contract and supported him with nearly £200million worth of signings during the summer transfer window.
However, Ashworth’s trust didn’t pay off and just weeks after United hired Sporting Lisbon boss Ruben Amorim, Ashworth was also sacked in £4.1million pay-off despite only joining the club in June.
Ashworth’s departure from Old Trafford suggested that Amorim wasn’t Ashworth’s preferred choice to succeed Ten Hag. And the Manchester Evening News has revealed that Ashworth endorsed two of his former managers.
It’s reported that Ashworth backed Gareth Southgate for the job, following their successful stint together at the FA. Southgate, 54, had resigned from his post as England manager in July, after suffering his second defeat in a major final.
The second name on Ashworth’s list was Newcastle boss Eddie Howe, with the two working together at St James’ Park for two years, but neither of Ashworth’s recommendations were hired.
It was reported last month that Ashworth cautioned United CEO Omar Berrada about potential ‘mass disruption’ following Amorim’s appointment, though time will tell if INEOS’ decision to hire the Portuguese will be a success.
United co-chairman Sir Jim Ratcliffe was asked by Gary Neville on The Overlap about Ashworth’s shock exit, with Ratcliffe admitting it was an ‘error’ to hire him. “You may know Dan better than I do,” Ratcliffe admitted to Neville. “I’m sure, in fact, you do. I don’t want to go into the details of it because I don’t think it serves much purpose.
“At the end of the day, it was chemistry. Maybe a bit more than chemistry, but let’s just say chemistry and it didn’t work. Just chemistry. I know it’s an unpopular decision and it’s seen as an error, and it was an error, but slightly in our defence, we did recognise it as something that would not work and therefore we decided we would make a change.
“What would have been far easier because of the scrutiny that we knew we would get in the media would have been to live with it, but I wasn’t prepared to live with it.”