But the real betrayal has been ongoing for the 18 years in which the Glazers have been in charge and the last thing United need is another decision that stops them moving forward as a club after so long surrendering ground to rivals. They have even been struggling to meet appropriate hygiene food ratings at the stadium of late.
The reality is that the thorny issue of Old Trafford’s future – something that could have been addressed long ago had the Glazers not been asleep on the job – presents not so much a problem as a unique opportunity for United to reimagine their spiritual home and Ratcliffe, for one, should view it as such.
We are not talking about an emotionally-charged relocation here. This is not West Ham leaving Upton Park and relocating three miles away to the London Stadium.
United own enough land around the existing ground that they could erect a new stadium in the vast swathes of car park space alone. Matchday would not have to be any different for the 74,000 who make their weekly pilgrimage to M16. There would be no change to the journeys some fans will have made for decades – or the rituals they hold dear.
At the same time, it would remove the dilemma of where United would play if Old Trafford in its existing form was redeveloped. Tottenham were able to build their magnificent new stadium on the site of the old White Hart Lane but had the benefit of being able to play at Wembley while construction took place.
United do not have a Wembley on their doorstep. There is nowhere in the North West that could logically house them. Equally, if they continued to play at Old Trafford while work was carried out it would have to be at reduced capacity which, aside from involving a huge hit to matchday income, would also likely mean thousands of regular match goers being unable to watch their team.
Given that redevelopment and expansion has been cited internally as an eight-year project, that equates to a lot of lost revenue, and potentially plenty of disgruntled fans, too, before other technological, logistical and bureaucratic challenges are factored in.
By contrast, United could keep playing in front of a full Old Trafford while construction work was underway in its shadow without either of those huge headaches – and likely end up with a new home on a shorter timescale.
Of course, what happens next will inevitably come down to money. Ratcliffe has ringfenced £237 million for infrastructure needs on top of his £1.03 billion purchase price for a 25 per cent stake in the club.
But that is barely going to touch the sides if United opt for a new stadium or a wholesale redevelopment of the current ground, and not some underwhelming half job.
Ratcliffe, in truth, knows that. He probably also knows that the club cannot stand by and do nothing any longer. Lee’s assertion that “everything is nearing its sell-by-date” at a decaying Old Trafford simply underlines that. This is the time for brave, bold thinking.
