The case was dropped, no trial took place as the key witness wouldn’t stand. (His missus) Dodgy case too many external parties involved, missus parents etc.
He doesn’t need to be convicted of an offence for Man U to sack him. Criminal law is based on beyond reasonable doubt, but employment law is based on balance of probability. So Man U just need to demonstrate that on balance, he acted in a way that would break trust in the working relationship, such as negative public image to the club. It’s not absolutely clear cut because we don’t know a lot of what Man U do, but as someone who works in HR, I would be advising the club to dismiss as I would not see too much risk in dismissing, based on what’s known to the public.
Neymar’s Saudi contract breakdown https://x.com/thennoww/status/1691908693137457222?s=46&t=mbGC1Uc_tqsItFVqKTDi-w
I agree, I would have thought a club like Man U who have a fan base worldwide wouldn't want away fans, who are more than likely to give him a hard time on the pitch, chanting derogatory songs being televised all over the world. Apart from the fact that could be a negative effect on other players playing. Even though things seem to be improving under Ten Hag, this and the Maguire episode doesn't show the club in a good light.
Brazil forward Neymar, 31, reportedly requested a 25-room mansion, a swimming pool and sauna, eight workers to keep his house tidy, nine cars and all expenses paid for travel, restaurants and hotels when he signed for Saudi Pro League side Al-Hilal. via BBC web Gossip
Bit of a step up from what I was offered, 12 hour days, seven day weeks, no beer. I declined. I think that is still the same gig for mere mortals.
It is now over 6 months since they announced..... “notes the decision” of the CPS and that it would “conduct its own process before determining next steps”. It added: “We will not make any further comment until that process is complete.” Yesterday they announced they were in the final stages. “The fact-finding phase of our investigation is now complete, and we are in the final stages of making a decision on Mason’s future. Contrary to media speculation, that decision has not yet been made and is currently the subject of intensive internal deliberation." One of the delays, is the three Man U women footballers at the world cup. My understanding is they wish to inform them of the decision, or maybe involve them, when they are done with the World Cup. They have taken longer with their deliberations than it took from the time of the arrest to dropping of all charges. Balance of probability? Or simply, Balance Sheet? https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-mason-greenwoods-future-at-manchester-united
I think they're clearly going to keep him and are desperately searching for the best way to make it palatable. One of the latest ways was to say they wanted to wait until they could consult the United players at the World Cup. Fantastic idea to put the responsibility on several young women, I'm sure they wouldn't get a hard time on social media about it.
As you are someone who works in HR,would you make a decision to dismiss someone in such a complex case,or would your Lawyers tell you it was 'safe' to do so? The amount of time this has taken by Man Utd suggests to me that their Lawyers are finding it difficult to come to a safe conclusion? I have no doubt in my mind that Mason Greenwoods Lawyers are eagerly awaiting their decision.
Leeds United fined £150,000 by the Football Association following homophobic chants by a section of supporters in the Premier League game against Brighton in March.
this probably doesn't qualify for "other" football news, but i can't see where else to put it. city defender tom nixon is on loan at doncaster city rovers and scored his first goal for them the other night. links to article and video below. https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.u...ann-after-debut-doncaster-rovers-goal-4258617 doncaster are in red hoops and nixon scores the first goal: https://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/12940868/doncaster-2-2-mansfield
