Erik ten Hag: Why are Manchester United and INEOS continuing to back the Dutchman in face of such adversity?

Why are Manchester United and INEOS continuing to stand by Erik Ten Hag in the face of such adversity and obvious underperformance? Sky Sports News' Melissa Reddy tells all...

Manchester United have been open in admitting the biggest problem at the club in the post Sir Alex Ferguson era has been the lack of a football-first approach, a proper brains trust with the best in the business and a structure that is in keeping with elite clubs across Europe.

There is the appreciation that so many good managers have come to Old Trafford and failed so the problem is with the foundation and correcting that as a starting point. They also know Erik ten Hag has dealt with so much off-pitch turmoil - whether that be player discipline or the takeover dragging on - and the new leadership football team felt he didn't have the best support, knowledge and help around him.

They allowed him to change his coaching team this summer, influence recruitment again, and have wanted to give him at the very least a full season under this new INEOS-powered set up to see if there'll be improvement. However, if dismal performance like Tottenham becomes the norm, it will be incredibly hard for them to stick to that approach.

A lot is a bit of an understatement - it's over £600m spent on recruitment during his tenure, but the profile of player did change this summer under INEOS with none signed over the age of 26. The five signings brought in during the window had no Premier League experience so there was an understanding that an adjustment period would be necessary.

Matthijs De Ligt, Noussair Mazraoui and Manuel Ugarte joined late, Joshua Zirkzee missed the pre-season tour and Leny Yoro got injured during the first match in the US, so there are mitigating circumstances.

None of them excuse the sorry performance against Tottenham, though. Ten Hag can point to the development of Amad, Kobbie Mainoo and Alejandro Garnacho to show he is advancing young talent, and the club have spoken about patience. The question they will be asking themselves, however, is if this is really the best football this squad can play?

United are 13th in the table, already six points off the Champions League places with as many games played. They have failed to score in three of their past four top-flight games and only Southampton, in 19th, have struggled to find the net more than Ten Hag's side this season.

The dismal surrender against Tottenham was the latest in a series of horror shows, adding to the 7-0 scorching by Liverpool, the 4-0 defeat to Crystal Palace, the humbling at the hands of Brentford by the same margin… How many more critical weeks can Ten Hag successfully navigate during his Old Trafford tenure?

The problem the Dutchman has is that some of the criminal flaws seen on Sunday - like not putting pressure against the ball and being so easy to play against - are recurring rather than a one-off. The issue for the club is the managerial landscape hasn't shifted since the summer, when they decided Ten Hag was their best option at the helm - bar the availability of Gareth Southgate. And they are aware appointing the former England manager would not be well received by the fanbase.

Prior to the 3-0 capitulation against Tottenham, the internal view at United was that despite the inconsistency of results this season, the team were showing signs of improvement in both their attacking and defensive metrics. The lack of a clinical edge in the final third was flagged as the biggest concern. However, familiar bad habits resurfaced against Spurs, which increases the scrutiny on Ten Hag regardless of what options are available.

With two international breaks up ahead, he is fighting for his job again because while the football leadership structure want to give Ten Hag at least a full season under the new set-up, more performances like Sunday won't be tolerated.

This can be cut up a number of ways. Firstly, the silence leading up to the FA Cup final when reports surfaced that Ten Hag was due to lose his job regardless of the result at Wembley spoke volumes. That their strategic review following victory against Manchester City then dragged on for two-and-a-half weeks, and encompassed openly engaging managers on the possibility of replacing Ten Hag before deciding to stick with him, told the same story as their silence; they were not fully convinced with the man at the helm.

That process and speaking to candidates which included Thomas Tuchel, Roberto De Zerbi, Kieran McKenna, Mauricio Pochettino and Thomas Frank ensured that at the first sign of trouble this season, Ten Hag's position was going to come under threat and lead to unrelenting noise and pressure.

Sporting director Dan Ashworth and CEO Omar Berrada, two of the most influential decision-makers if there is to be a change in the dugout, were not involved in the conclusion of keeping Ten Hag in the summer as it preceded their employment with United.

The choice was driven by Sir Jim Ratcliffe and Sir Dave Brailsford. INEOS will counter that their process was laboured and guaranteed Ten Hag wouldn't be a sitting duck by stating it was a thorough review which required time and they have backed their guy in the transfer market and on the record. The idea of granting him a chance to work under the new and improved structure is fair and makes sense but how they applied it - the ignominy of Ten Hag reading and hearing about their meetings with other managers to potentially replace him and not being firm and certain about their intentions even before Wembley - was flawed.

A reminder, too, that the manager had revealed the review and his discussion with United's hierarchy had already happened before the FA Cup final. Despite already having all the information on last season and with Ten Hag himself believing the assessment had already been done, the club insisted their review only started after the Wembley win. The accusations persist that the hierarchy were ultimately influenced by the superb performance against City, and were hamstrung by financial parameters in appointing a successor. Had Ten Hag not delivered a second trophy, would he have survived overseeing unwanted records of new lows in the Premier League and Champions League last season?

Yes - some sources at the club were even saying to me that they felt it was the strongest position he'd been in since winning the League Cup final in 2023. Ten Hag had survived the strategic review, gave the leadership team a piece of his mind about professional respect and needing to work in an open, honest and collaborative way, got to redesign his coaching staff and influence recruitment.

Ashworth, Berrada and Jason Wilcox spent a lot of time with the manager on tour and there was definitely a huge effort to promote togetherness and a fresh energy around the club. Ten Hag himself told Sky Sports that while he could feel the enhanced dynamic and positivity surrounding United, the real test would come in choppy waters. He was right.

Ten Hag would say this is his first season under a proper football structure and rattle off all the things he's had to deal with since taking charge: Cristiano Ronaldo, the Mason Greenwood situation, the takeover, Marcus Rashford's ill-discipline, an attempt to get him the sack through the press, being on trial for his job once INEOS took control of the sporting side of the club, an almighty injury crisis. He would say a trophy and Champions League football in his first season followed by rescuing a torrid last campaign by landing the FA Cup at Man City's expense merited another chance.

Ten Hag has repeatedly asked to be judged at the end of this season, not now. His critics will point out that through all of this, United do not have a defined way of playing or a discernible identity. The only consistency comes from their flaws - the vacant spaces in midfield, the abysmal rest defence, the muddled press, and the inability to build out from the back despite constructing a team to do exactly that. Teams with far less resources than United have shown far more footballing nous.

Given how many times he has called their effort unacceptable, yes. On Sunday, when Sky Sports News asked if him the issue against Spurs was tactical or psychological, he said it was the latter. The manager ultimately has to take responsibility for non-performances and failing to maximise the talent in the squad, but the players at United also need to have a hard look at themselves.

How can you give up tracking your runner? How do you lose the ball, throw your arms in the air and then not make any attempt to be involved in play? Some of the body language is appalling and there is an absence of fight - for standards and to dig each other out of trouble.

The top clubs have players who make sure that if levels drop, they are correcting at source on the pitch and having words with their team-mates, which also happens in the dressing room. Sources have said this is a failing at United.

INEOS have wanted to judge him on how he performs under an improved structure, with greater support and a recruitment drive that focused on erasing some blind spots and enhancing the physical flooring of the squad.

They want to be back in the Champions League - they have to be financially - they want to be building up to be kings of England again and so consistency in the top-flight is the biggest measurement. Cups should be a complement to that.

Prior to INEOS putting in a football operational structure with some of the best in the business, perhaps.

But now you have a solid foundation to build off, a talented squad that is seriously underperforming, and the opportunity to implement an identity.