Sir Jim Ratcliffe's controversial Wembley decision backfires as bleak Manchester United truth becomes clear

When it rains, it pours.

That was, quite literally, the case at Old Trafford on Sunday as a storm wreaked havoc inside the stadium following Manchester United's 1-0 defeat to Arsenal in the Premier League. It was Leandro Trossard's first-half goal that had sunk Erik Ten Hag's side but the sight of the rain funneling down from the roof and onto the seats of the Sir Alex Ferguson Stand after the full-time whistle pointed to a far more pervasive issue.

It was an afternoon that laid bare the extent of the club's degradation since the end of Ferguson's vaunted tenure. Where once there there was glory, there is chronic disillusionment; the Theatre of Dreams is now a House of Horrors.

ALSO READ: Under-fire manager finally delivers on promise as he attempts to save his Man United job

ALSO READ: Man United stars finally know where they stand as Sir Jim Ratcliffe's loyalties become clear

And there, watching the carnage unfold, was minority shareholder Sir Jim Ratcliffe - the man tasked with putting this footballing goliath back on its perch. His mere presence, though, was divisive, the view in some quarters being that the INEOS chief should have been in attendance at Wembley as Manchester United Women won their first major trophy.

While Ten Hag's side were toiling against the Gunners, United captain Katie Zelem was lifting the Women's FA Cup in front of almost 80,000 fans in north-west London. It had been a scintillating display from the Reds against Tottenham Hotspur, with a wonder-strike from Ella Toone plus goals from Rachel Williams and Lucia Garcia firing them to victory.

There was, it must be noted, INEOS representation at Wembley. Chief financial officer Roger Bell and director for corporate affairs and