In April 2019, in the early evening before the Manchester derby, a thunderstorm rolled
over the city.
Manchester United would lose 2-0. The game’s enduring symbol, however, would be the torrent
of rainwater which would leak through the stadium’s roof ahead of kick-off, and cascade
onto the seats below.
It was as a symbol of neglect, and of how the biggest club stadium in England, once
the envy of the entire country, has been allowed to deteriorate.
Leaks were nothing new. Back in 2012, when
Old Trafford was being used as a venue for that summer’s Olympic football tournament,
supporters had to dodge a torrent of water that rained down off the north stand ahead
of a match between Spain and Morocco.
The drainage issues have subsequently been fixed but, to many, these were embarrassing
reminders of a lack of progress – of the Glazer family’s failure to modernise the
stadium.
Or actually to change much at all. The Glazers have owned Manchester United since 2005. But,
while the most recent upgrade took place in 2006, that project – which involved adding
second tiers to the North-West and North-East quadrants and raising the capacity by 8,000
– was commissioned and approved before the Glazers took control.
It means that nothing significant has happened
in over 15 years.
It’s made worse, by the fact that during the same period, a whole host of other clubs
have opened new or improved stadiums. Arsenal have moved to the Emirates, Manchester City
have significantly upgraded the Etihad, Liverpool have built a new main stand and, most recently,
Tottenham have moved into a state-of-the-art replacement for White Hart Lane.
Around Europe, Real Madrid are currently renovating
the Santiago Bernabeu at a cost of €795m and, although on hold, Barcelona have plans
for an expansion to Camp Nou.
Back at Old Trafford, complaints from fans focus on familiar issues. The poor quality
of the concourses, the catering facilities, and the absence of a big screen. One of the
keys to the stadiums high capacity is narrow rows between seats. And, while that might
be an efficient use of space, many supporters – even those of less than average height
– complain of being uncomfortable during games.
Some of the problems are much more embarrassing,
though. Old Trafford has also had a long-standing rodent problem. In 2015, Health Inspectors
from the local council criticised the club for “failing to implement adequate procedures
to control pests within the food areas” in the north and south stands, with the report
also advising that “all food rooms should be inspected for possible pest entry points.”
Other issues are logistical – certainly
regarding expansion.
The South Stand has remained in much the same state for nearly 50 years. It’s less noticeable
to television audiences, because the cameras point away from it during live games, but
it’s single-tiered and noticeably smaller than the other three sides of the ground.
But upgrading is difficult. The stand backs onto a railway line and so adding any extra
tiers or developing it in any meaningful way would involve bridging over the track.
Not an insurmountable problem, but not a cheap
one to solve, either.
In December 2017, it was reported that the latest scheme to renovate and expand the South
Stand had stalled over projected costs of more than £750m. As of May 2020, it was also
reported that all expansion projects relating to Old Trafford were on hold.
And there’s little financial necessity – or
at least for bearing such cost. In the last season to be unaffected by the pandemic, United
reported £110m in matchday revenue, some way ahead of Arsenal (96.2m), Liverpool (84.2m),
Tottenham (81.7m) and Chelsea (66.6m).
The club also argue that they have committed significant funds to Old Trafford. In 2019,
for instance, they pointed to £20m worth of stadium investment, accounted for by £4
million on security upgrades, a further £4 million to redevelop hospitality areas and
£11 million in improvements to make the ground more wheelchair accessible. Ahead of the 2018
season, they also refurbished both the home and away dressing-rooms.
But these are small changes. Fans continue
to notice rust on the stadium, photographers have often pictured mice that have run onto
the pitch during games, and journalists remain frustrated by the outdated media facilities
and the poor quality wifi – and that connectivity once caused a controversy between Paul Pogba
and Jose Mourinho, back in 2018.
Mourinho reacted badly to an Instagram story posted on Pogba’s account which apparently
showed the midfielder laughing after United have been knocked out of the Carabao Cup by
Derby County on penalties. In fact, Pogba, who had been watching from the stands, had
tried to upload his post an hour before and the timing was just an awkward coincidence.
Of greater concern, though, is the lack of
future vision surrounding Old Trafford. According to a source quoted by The Athletic in May
2020, that represents a change in attitude from the ownership.
“When (the Glazers) first came, they had
the intention of rebuilding Old Trafford. They were desperate to buy up all the land
around the ground. But they have given up on the stadium.”
That seems to be because of feasibility and the potential cost.
And that’s an added frustration: while United
have spent millions of pounds acquiring property in the area, it has never been developed.
In a less than flattering contrast with Manchester City, who boast the sprawling Etihad Campus,
United have no Reserve or Youth Team mini stadium and no grand facilities. Hotel Football,
the most visible adjacent property, isn’t owned by United, but rather – in part – by
the group of ex-players known collectively as the Class of 92.
So, what next?
Well, according to a Daily Mail article from
February 2020, the current state of Old Trafford would be ‘off-putting’ to potential buyers
should the Glazers ever try to sell Manchester United. And, with the club’s estimated valuation
of over £2bn, there are likely to be very few of those to start with.
But with the effects of the pandemic, the
recent collapse of the proposed breakaway Super League, which promised a €3.5n windfall
for the participating clubs, the most visible emblem of Manchester United’s rich history
doesn’t seem likely to benefit from any major restoration soon.