'Big level of interest' - Sheikh Jassim stance on fresh Manchester United takeover bid 'revealed'

Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al-Thani is reportedly still interested in a possible takeover of Manchester United after Sir Jim Ratcliffe won the race to invest in the club.

It is understood Sheikh Jassim and the Nine Two Foundation made a £4.79billion offer to buy the club outright from the Glazer family though, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings revealed earlier in the year the Qatari failed to provide proof of funds before he eventually withdrew from the process.

His withdrawal led to the Glazers accepting an offer from Ratcliffe to buy a quarter of the club's shares for £1.25 billion that valued the club at the £5bn mark.

The Ineos era started well with open dialogue and clarity towards fans, though optimism has started to dwindle after huge job cuts, a poorly handled managerial sacking and another questionable summer transfer window, while the cost to watch the team has increased while performance on the pitch has declined. Ratcliffe is adamant these tough business decisions need to be made for the long-term benefit of the club, while there is also an acceptance that time is required to turn things around and change the culture at Old Trafford.

However, if things don't go according to plan, the Daily Mail claim Sheikh Jassim is still very much interested in any investment opportunity and dreams of owning the team he supposedly supports. "He is still a United fan. He is not going to rush off and try another Premier League club," a Qatari advisor told them. "If the opportunity to buy the whole of Manchester United arose again at some point in the future it is hard to see there not being a big level of interest. The plans are still there."

The report also claims had Sheikh Jassim been successful in his takeover attempt then he would have removed all the club's debt and revealed fully-funded plans for a new stadium within days of announcing their takeover. It must all be taken with a pinch of salt, given he could not provide proof of his funds during the process.