Ratcliffe should pay for a new stadium THEMSELVES instead of using public money

Sir Jim Ratcliffe's proposal to build a new stadium for Manchester United using public money has been criticised as 'nonsense' by Mail Sport's Ian Ladyman.

Ratcliffe's deal for a 27.7 per cent investment in the club, worth approximately £1.25billion, was rubberstamped by the Premier League and the FA earlier this month, allowing the billionaire to discuss his plans in detail.

His purchase, which has wrestled control of football operations from the Glazer family, also includes £237million set aside for the club's ground.

United currently play at the 74,310-capacity Old Trafford and have not relocated since 1910. Ratcliffe believes the venue is 'tired and in need of refurbishment'.

The businessman's preference is to build a new stadium that would act as the 'Wembley of the North', as revealed by Mail Sport. Refurbishing Old Trafford would cost in the region of £800m but may prove to be a short-term measure.

A new build, meanwhile, could cost between £1bn and £2bn.

'If it can be achieved (with taxpayers' money), it would clearly be my preference,' Ratcliffe told the BBC, although the government are likely to reject the approach.

Ladyman, however, disagrees with Ratcliffe's sprawling vision.

Speaking on the latest edition of the It's All Kicking Off podcast, he said: 'Sir Jim Ratcliffe can talk all he likes about building a bigger museum at Old Trafford and building a bigger club shop and knocking down the stadium and rebuilding it, etc.

'Although Ratcliffe's suggestion that he might do that with public money is absolutely extraordinary. I've never heard such nonsense in my life.

'If he wants the Wembley of the North, he should pay for it himself. That's the issue.

'If you want a new stadium, build it. He's now a 30 per cent