Manchester United said Thursday that the club takes pride in being “inclusive and welcoming” following co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s claim that the UK has been “colonized by immigrants.”

Ratcliffe said he was sorry if he had “offended some people” for his remarks in a Sky News interview on Wednesday, which were heavily criticised by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and the Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham.

Sources have told ESPN that the English Football Association (FA) is aware of Ratcliffe’s comments and is looking into the matter.

“Manchester United prides itself on being an inclusive and welcoming club,” the Premier League club said in a statement.

“Our diverse group of players, staff and global community of supporters, reflect the history and heritage of Manchester; a city that anyone can call home.

“Since launching All Red All Equal in 2016, we have embedded equality, diversity and inclusion into everything we do.

“We remain deeply committed to the principles and spirit of that campaign. They are reflected in our policies but also in our culture and are reinforced by our holding of the Premier League’s Advanced Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Standard.”

Earlier on Thursday. Ratcliffe said in his own statement: “I am sorry that my choice of language has offended some people in the UK and Europe and caused concern, but it is important to raise the issue of controlled and well-managed immigration that supports economic growth.

“My comments were made while answering questions about UK policy at the European Industry Summit in Antwerp, where I was discussing the importance of economic growth, jobs, skills and manufacturing in the UK.

“My intention was to stress that governments must manage migration alongside investment in skills, industry and jobs so that long-term prosperity is shared by everyone. It is critical that we maintain an open debate on the challenges facing the UK.”

His attempt to row back cut little ice with the Manchester United Muslim Supporters’ Club (MUMSC), who issued a dissatisfied response.

“We have noted Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s apology for his ‘choice of language,’ the group said. “However, we do not believe this sufficiently addresses the seriousness of what was said.

“The term ‘colonised’ was repeated and used to describe modern Britain. That language carries significant weight and cannot be dismissed as simply poor phrasing.”

“Expressing regret for causing offence is not the same as acknowledging the wider impact of words used. Leadership requires accountability as well as openness to debate.”

Ratcliffe told Sky News on Wednesday: “You can’t have an economy with 9 million people on benefits and huge levels of immigrants coming in.

“I mean, the UK is being colonized. It’s costing too much money. The UK has been colonized by immigrants.”

Should the FA choose to formally investigate the comments, the probe may be focused on FA Rule E3.1, which covers general activity.

The rule states: “A participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.”

Rule E3.2 states that a breach of Rule E3.1 would be considered an “aggravated breach” where it includes a reference, whether express or implied, to any one or more of the following — ethnic origin, color, race, nationality, religion or belief, gender, gender reassignment, sexual orientation or disability.

Ratcliffe, as a club co-owner, is subject to FA rules as a participant.

– UK PM Starmer demands apology from ‘offensive’ Ratcliffe
– Sir Jim Ratcliffe: ‘Very unpopular’ Man United changes paying off

Burnham, who is part of a group of local officials working with Ratcliffe and United on the regeneration of the Old Trafford area and stadium, said: “These comments go against everything for which Manchester has traditionally stood: a place where people of all races and faiths have pulled together over centuries to build our city and our institutions, including Manchester United FC.

“Calling for curbs on levels of immigration is one thing, portraying those who come here as a hostile invading force is quite another. It is inaccurate, insulting and inflammatory and should be withdrawn.

“Footballers who have arrived from all over the world to play in Greater Manchester have enhanced the life of our city region, as have the many people working in Greater Manchester’s NHS and other essential services and industries.

“We appreciate their contribution as a city region famous for the warmth of our welcome.”

In what appeared to be criticism of the Glazer family who hold a majority stake in United, Burnham added: “If any criticism is needed, it should be directed towards those who have offered little contribution to our life here and have instead spent years siphoning wealth out of one of our proudest institutions.”

ESPN’s Rob Dawson and PA contributed to this report.

In a letter to NCAA president Charlie Baker, the Big Ten Conference Student-Athlete Issues Commission (SAIC) called for a continued push to limit or outright ban prop bets based on individual college athletes to reduce harassment and protect mental health and game integrity.

The SAIC wrote Tuesday that student-athletes are receiving angry messages, threats or criticism from bettors when wagers lose, including from fans who sit behind the bench “yelling horrible things” and on social media.

A 2025 study of more than 20,000 student-athletes found that 51% of Division I men’s basketball players had received social media abuse based on their performance, much of it coming from bettors.

“Prop bets are a direct avenue to the overwhelming number of death threats that student-athletes receive if they ‘ruin a parlay’ or cause a fan to lose a bet,” the letter to Baker states.

Baker has pushed state gambling regulators to ban sportsbooks from offering prop bets on individual college players. More than a dozen states prohibit sportsbooks from offering college props, but still jurisdictions allow them, including on alternate betting platforms such as daily fantasy and sweepstakes sites.

Missouri gaming regulators recently denied a request from the NCAA to eliminate college player props.

The SAIC also expressed concern about prop bets damaging the integrity of the game by creating doubt about a player’s performance.

“These athletes are often young and more susceptible to influence, including financial incentives that may encourage them to perform in a certain way or affect specific outcomes,” the letter says.

Last year, three Division I basketball players were ruled ineligible for participating in a gambling scheme centered on prop bets on individual statistics.

“While we understand that sports betting is becoming increasingly more common across the country and allows for states to generate increased tax revenue, prop betting represents unique risks at the college level,” the SAIC wrote. “We believe protecting student-athletes must be a priority. Limiting or eliminating prop betting on college athletics would be a meaningful step toward reducing harassment, protecting mental well-being, and preserving the integrity of college competition.”