Manchester United have undergone major structural changes since Sir Jim Ratcliffe arrived at Old Trafford, with the INEOS chief making some tough decisions at the top. But taking on Sir Alex Ferguson might just be his most audacious move yet after sacking the United icon.

It was reported on Tuesday that the 82-year-old's ambassadorial role worth £2.16million a year would be axed from the budget as part of further cost-cutting measures.

Sir Alex was informed of the decision in a face-to-face meeting with Ratcliffe, who became the club's new leader of football operations in May after INEOS acquired a 25 per cent stake for £1.4bn.

Ratcliffe has already overseen a controversial move to make over 250 staff members redundant, despite the club spending over £200million on transfers this summer. According to The Athletic, Ferguson's agreement had been highlighted during that process.

The move may not go down well with United fans, however, given Ferguson very much remains an iconic figure as arguably the club's greatest manager with 13 Premier League titles and two Champions League winners medals.

The Scot has served as a global ambassador and club director since walking away from the dugout 11 years ago and has often been seen in the stands with fellow high-ranking club officials. But it appears his long-running association with the club has reached a potentially sour conclusion.

Did Ferguson deserved to get sacked by Man Utd's ruthless owner Ratcliffe? Vote NOW in our interactive poll below.