A new Manchester United stadium isn’t about regeneration and never will be

If ‘New Trafford’ is such a nailed-on wealth generator, then why aren’t Ratcliffe and the Glazers funding it themselves?

Undated handout provided by Foster + Partners of a conceptual image of what the new Manchester United stadium and surrounding area could look like. Manchester United has thrown its support behind the Government's growth agenda by announcing its intention to pursue a new 100,000-seater stadium as the centrepiece of the regeneration of the Old Trafford area. 

The roof of the proposed new Manchester United stadium has three points, which is more than can often be said for the team who will play underneath it. According to Nigel Dancey of the architectural firm Foster + Partners, the three giant masts will “create a distinctive presence on the skyline”, presumably in the same way that Roy Keane created a distinctive presence on Alf‑Inge Haaland’s knee.

But of course aesthetic quibbles are the least of our concerns here. If Manchester United want to erect a giant plastic canopy over their new 100,000-seat stadium in a way that evokes a chicken being wrapped before roasting, then frankly who are we to demur? Beauty is in the eye of the freeholder, and all that. The more pressing question – as someone who, unlike part-owner Jim Ratcliffe, still pays income tax in this country – is what exactly the rest of us are getting out of this.