comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 3 minutes ago
If United and Erik want him to rejoin the squad next season I will presume they think it's OK and and wont affect the progress we are making and in fact, will improve it.Then that is fine with me. In Erik I trust.
However if they are not sure then he moves on. Simples. He will probably get a lot of interest from other clubs. Last time I saw him play he was feckin good.
He not been found guilty of anything, (apart from being an idiot) which, whilst annoying people who want a pound of his flesh, is the actual state of affairs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
More than being an idiot in my eyes.
He was threatening her and was menacing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats your opinion 52. Please dont use me to validate your opinions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not opinion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately for you it is an opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not unfortunately to me. It has never been denied it was him on the recording.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
52
You are much smarter than this.You have no idea about that recording. And yoiu probably never will.
Stop being an idiot
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
Send him up to Ibrox….we don’t give a fck
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arent they the only scenarios available?
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arent they the only scenarios available?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think he's saying that he won't be sacked. So that's not a likely option
On the flipside though a large chunk of our fanbase are very excited about being owned by the Qataris despite the fact it's incredibly likely the money is really coming from the state. They have done far far worse things than Greenwood allegedly did too.
….
So did the last Labour Government.
United wont sack him cos there will be a queue to buy him for good money. Hes a really good player.
I suppose United could donate any fee they did get for Greenwood to charity?
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him for bringing the club into disrepute The audio has damaged the clubs image and jeopardised sponsorship deals.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 minutes ago
On the flipside though a large chunk of our fanbase are very excited about being owned by the Qataris despite the fact it's incredibly likely the money is really coming from the state. They have done far far worse things than Greenwood allegedly did too.
….
So did the last Labour Government.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. But then the Tories, in opposition at the time, voted overwhelming in favour of the war too if that's what you're getting at there. We'd have gone either way.
I agree with you though. When we stop our busy lives for a second and analyse what is actually happening all around us it can actually be quite grim can't it? Greed corruption and much much worse is evident everywhere.
Separate from the incident that has him suspended the recent Laurie Whitwell article in the Athletic on him paints him as a bit of t-t. Parties during lockdown, not turning up for team meetings, not being focused enough. Best to just get rid, he’s a talent but the club don’t need him.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him for bringing the club into disrepute The audio has damaged the clubs image and jeopardised sponsorship deals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't stick though.
He has denied the allegations and hasnt been convicted of anything. Hed stand a good chance at beating those claims in a tribunal. The fact they are back together and having a kid doesn't help the club in that pursuit one bit either.
If sacking him was a viable option I think it would have already happened by now personally.
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 59 seconds ago
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole thing is weird.
What was this new evidence also that came to light? The police statement said withdrawal of key witness AND new evidence.
What bleeding new evidence would that be then? I don't get it and I doubt we will ever get the full answers either.
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him for bringing the club into disrepute The audio has damaged the clubs image and jeopardised sponsorship deals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't stick though.
He has denied the allegations and hasnt been convicted of anything. Hed stand a good chance at beating those claims in a tribunal. The fact they are back together and having a kid doesn't help the club in that pursuit one bit either.
If sacking him was a viable option I think it would have already happened by now personally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't whether it would stand up or not. But I think there would be a good chance. More likely a mutual parting of ways would happen though.
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 59 seconds ago
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole thing is weird.
What was this new evidence also that came to light? The police statement said withdrawal of key witness AND new evidence.
What bleeding new evidence would that be then? I don't get it and I doubt we will ever get the full answers either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it will all come out in a book one day
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 59 seconds ago
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole thing is weird.
What was this new evidence also that came to light? The police statement said withdrawal of key witness AND new evidence.
What bleeding new evidence would that be then? I don't get it and I doubt we will ever get the full answers either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it will all come out in a book one day
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Culers already told me.
I'd say put him out on loan (ideally abroad) until everyone forgets and then bring him back if he's still a good player
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 24 minutes ago
United wont sack him cos there will be a queue to buy him for good money. Hes a really good player.
I suppose United could donate any fee they did get for Greenwood to charity?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why on earth would we do that.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 59 seconds ago
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole thing is weird.
What was this new evidence also that came to light? The police statement said withdrawal of key witness AND new evidence.
What bleeding new evidence would that be then? I don't get it and I doubt we will ever get the full answers either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it will all come out in a book one day
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Culers already told me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fack me forgot about Culer, been so busy with other things
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 24 minutes ago
United wont sack him cos there will be a queue to buy him for good money. Hes a really good player.
I suppose United could donate any fee they did get for Greenwood to charity?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why on earth would we do that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We wouldnt.
Didn't expect this from United. Always been more of a classy club.
To me it's the equivalent of having a mate who you know knocks his wife around a bit, or just generallybtratsbher like shiiit, but they're still together and you're still happy to drink with him down the pub and say nothing.
The lad is a wrongun, and if you want him representing Manchester United then expect to be judged accordingly. Ask yourself this, if he was some crap player would you be so willing to over look his clear indiscretions .
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
Didn't expect this from United. Always been more of a classy club.
To me it's the equivalent of having a mate who you know knocks his wife around a bit, or just generallybtratsbher like shiiit, but they're still together and you're still happy to drink with him down the pub and say nothing.
The lad is a wrongun, and if you want him representing Manchester United then expect to be judged accordingly. Ask yourself this, if he was some crap player would you be so willing to over look his clear indiscretions .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that analogy doesn’t really work, because in this instance is an employee of a company, and the UK has something called employment law.
comment by merrysupersteve (relaxed about the situation) (U1132)
posted 12 hours, 7 minutes ago
If he does come back and play every week as if nothing has happened, we should have a Partey to celebrate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Underrated comment
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
Didn't expect this from United. Always been more of a classy club.
To me it's the equivalent of having a mate who you know knocks his wife around a bit, or just generallybtratsbher like shiiit, but they're still together and you're still happy to drink with him down the pub and say nothing.
The lad is a wrongun, and if you want him representing Manchester United then expect to be judged accordingly. Ask yourself this, if he was some crap player would you be so willing to over look his clear indiscretions .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that analogy doesn’t really work, because in this instance is an employee of a company, and the UK has something called employment law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sign in if you want to comment
Greenwood
Page 3 of 9
6 | 7 | 8 | 9
posted on 1/4/23
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 3 minutes ago
If United and Erik want him to rejoin the squad next season I will presume they think it's OK and and wont affect the progress we are making and in fact, will improve it.Then that is fine with me. In Erik I trust.
However if they are not sure then he moves on. Simples. He will probably get a lot of interest from other clubs. Last time I saw him play he was feckin good.
He not been found guilty of anything, (apart from being an idiot) which, whilst annoying people who want a pound of his flesh, is the actual state of affairs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
More than being an idiot in my eyes.
He was threatening her and was menacing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats your opinion 52. Please dont use me to validate your opinions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not opinion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately for you it is an opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not unfortunately to me. It has never been denied it was him on the recording.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
52
You are much smarter than this.You have no idea about that recording. And yoiu probably never will.
Stop being an idiot
posted on 1/4/23
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
posted on 1/4/23
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
posted on 1/4/23
Send him up to Ibrox….we don’t give a fck
posted on 1/4/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arent they the only scenarios available?
posted on 1/4/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arent they the only scenarios available?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think he's saying that he won't be sacked. So that's not a likely option
posted on 1/4/23
On the flipside though a large chunk of our fanbase are very excited about being owned by the Qataris despite the fact it's incredibly likely the money is really coming from the state. They have done far far worse things than Greenwood allegedly did too.
….
So did the last Labour Government.
posted on 1/4/23
United wont sack him cos there will be a queue to buy him for good money. Hes a really good player.
I suppose United could donate any fee they did get for Greenwood to charity?
posted on 1/4/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him for bringing the club into disrepute The audio has damaged the clubs image and jeopardised sponsorship deals.
posted on 1/4/23
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 minutes ago
On the flipside though a large chunk of our fanbase are very excited about being owned by the Qataris despite the fact it's incredibly likely the money is really coming from the state. They have done far far worse things than Greenwood allegedly did too.
….
So did the last Labour Government.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True. But then the Tories, in opposition at the time, voted overwhelming in favour of the war too if that's what you're getting at there. We'd have gone either way.
I agree with you though. When we stop our busy lives for a second and analyse what is actually happening all around us it can actually be quite grim can't it? Greed corruption and much much worse is evident everywhere.
posted on 1/4/23
Separate from the incident that has him suspended the recent Laurie Whitwell article in the Athletic on him paints him as a bit of t-t. Parties during lockdown, not turning up for team meetings, not being focused enough. Best to just get rid, he’s a talent but the club don’t need him.
posted on 1/4/23
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him for bringing the club into disrepute The audio has damaged the clubs image and jeopardised sponsorship deals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't stick though.
He has denied the allegations and hasnt been convicted of anything. Hed stand a good chance at beating those claims in a tribunal. The fact they are back together and having a kid doesn't help the club in that pursuit one bit either.
If sacking him was a viable option I think it would have already happened by now personally.
posted on 1/4/23
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
posted on 1/4/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 59 seconds ago
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole thing is weird.
What was this new evidence also that came to light? The police statement said withdrawal of key witness AND new evidence.
What bleeding new evidence would that be then? I don't get it and I doubt we will ever get the full answers either.
posted on 1/4/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 8 minutes ago
United up shiete creek without a paddle,
Can't sack him,he would go for unfair dismissal,can't play him the sponsers would abandon ship,only option is to pay up his contract and make him a free agent,sure that he will find another club to take him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a paddle. We can afford it either way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They can sack him and there is a decent chance United would win an unfair dismissal case, if it was brought against them. More likely though, they would just come to a mutual termination with a pay off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him on what grounds? He hasn't gone to court and has no record. And the person who he is alleged to have done these things too wants to marry him and is having his child soon.
Sacking him isn't straight forward at all. In fact that avenue is a bleeding mine field.
Two most likely scenarios are a sale/loan or him coming back into the fold.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sack him for bringing the club into disrepute The audio has damaged the clubs image and jeopardised sponsorship deals.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't stick though.
He has denied the allegations and hasnt been convicted of anything. Hed stand a good chance at beating those claims in a tribunal. The fact they are back together and having a kid doesn't help the club in that pursuit one bit either.
If sacking him was a viable option I think it would have already happened by now personally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't whether it would stand up or not. But I think there would be a good chance. More likely a mutual parting of ways would happen though.
posted on 1/4/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 59 seconds ago
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole thing is weird.
What was this new evidence also that came to light? The police statement said withdrawal of key witness AND new evidence.
What bleeding new evidence would that be then? I don't get it and I doubt we will ever get the full answers either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it will all come out in a book one day
posted on 2/4/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 59 seconds ago
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole thing is weird.
What was this new evidence also that came to light? The police statement said withdrawal of key witness AND new evidence.
What bleeding new evidence would that be then? I don't get it and I doubt we will ever get the full answers either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it will all come out in a book one day
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Culers already told me.
posted on 2/4/23
I'd say put him out on loan (ideally abroad) until everyone forgets and then bring him back if he's still a good player
posted on 2/4/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 24 minutes ago
United wont sack him cos there will be a queue to buy him for good money. Hes a really good player.
I suppose United could donate any fee they did get for Greenwood to charity?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why on earth would we do that.
posted on 2/4/23
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 59 seconds ago
This converstaion is getting a bit wierd now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The whole thing is weird.
What was this new evidence also that came to light? The police statement said withdrawal of key witness AND new evidence.
What bleeding new evidence would that be then? I don't get it and I doubt we will ever get the full answers either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it will all come out in a book one day
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Culers already told me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fack me forgot about Culer, been so busy with other things
posted on 2/4/23
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 24 minutes ago
United wont sack him cos there will be a queue to buy him for good money. Hes a really good player.
I suppose United could donate any fee they did get for Greenwood to charity?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why on earth would we do that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We wouldnt.
posted on 2/4/23
Didn't expect this from United. Always been more of a classy club.
To me it's the equivalent of having a mate who you know knocks his wife around a bit, or just generallybtratsbher like shiiit, but they're still together and you're still happy to drink with him down the pub and say nothing.
The lad is a wrongun, and if you want him representing Manchester United then expect to be judged accordingly. Ask yourself this, if he was some crap player would you be so willing to over look his clear indiscretions .
posted on 2/4/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
Didn't expect this from United. Always been more of a classy club.
To me it's the equivalent of having a mate who you know knocks his wife around a bit, or just generallybtratsbher like shiiit, but they're still together and you're still happy to drink with him down the pub and say nothing.
The lad is a wrongun, and if you want him representing Manchester United then expect to be judged accordingly. Ask yourself this, if he was some crap player would you be so willing to over look his clear indiscretions .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that analogy doesn’t really work, because in this instance is an employee of a company, and the UK has something called employment law.
posted on 2/4/23
comment by merrysupersteve (relaxed about the situation) (U1132)
posted 12 hours, 7 minutes ago
If he does come back and play every week as if nothing has happened, we should have a Partey to celebrate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Underrated comment
posted on 2/4/23
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
Didn't expect this from United. Always been more of a classy club.
To me it's the equivalent of having a mate who you know knocks his wife around a bit, or just generallybtratsbher like shiiit, but they're still together and you're still happy to drink with him down the pub and say nothing.
The lad is a wrongun, and if you want him representing Manchester United then expect to be judged accordingly. Ask yourself this, if he was some crap player would you be so willing to over look his clear indiscretions .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that analogy doesn’t really work, because in this instance is an employee of a company, and the UK has something called employment law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 3 of 9
6 | 7 | 8 | 9