Redcanuck

12 27

Spanish Football Federation to sue Hermoso for her comments about Rubiales who they say is telling the truth about the incident.

Right. Sorry about that. Still thought he was a better player before he got to Chelsea.

Wasn't he better at Leicester? I thought he was. Must have been something about him for Chelsea to buy. I would take him at United on loan with an option to buy.

Awful late penalty, was it justifiable? Asking on behalf of my Wednesday supporting relatives in Sheffield.

Sterling the difference, might just be the best I have seen Sterling play for Chelsea.

Man Utd

18 24

That's the problem. You can lose a player while any windows are opened. You don't have to sell of course but it's tough keeping a player who wants to leave.

Al-Ittihad have said they are pretty confident this gets done this sumer. It might be false bravado, but I belive they have til September 30th before their window closes. Could be a long month for Liverpool.

Friday 25th August, 2023 Chelsea 2-0 Luton, 20.00 Saturday 26th August, 2023 Bournemouth 0-2 Tottenham, 12.30 Arsenal 2-0 Fulham Brentford 2-1 Crystal Palace Everton 1-1 Wolves Man Utd 2-0 Nottm Forest Brighton 2-0 West Ham, 17.30 Sunday 27th August, 2023 Burnley 1-2 Aston Villa, 14.00 Sheff Utd 0-3 Man City, 14.00 Newcastle 1-1 Liverpool, 16.30

You would think so. My stats would be better feeding Haaland.

I didnt say there was an issue, just that I didn't know anything about him. Was asking if he was any good, because his stats aren't.

I am obviously still bitter that Shearer didn't come to United.

9Tough question. I guess it could depend on whether the club you support is consider one of the so called big clubs or not. I never rated Shearer that highly because I believed he turned United down because he didn't have the balls to compete on the big stage, that he settled for being a big fish in a small pond. Probably would have felt different if I supported Newcastle.

Gabriel continuing to not start, is puzzling. Any truth to the rumours he is headed to Saudi Arabia?

Legally I am not sure. Their not really violating his contract if they pay him out in full.

We are never going to hear the full recording and what is on it and find out whether it changes our prespective of what happened or not. However, according to Richard Arnold it's a long recording and there is something on it that caused him to believe that the short clip we heard is not a true reflection on what was going on. That does seem hard to believe but he does seem to believe it. If United wanted to get rid of him and this is just a PR exercise to stop him suing them from ending his contract, why wouldn't they just agree to pay out the rest of his contract and wish him luck with his future endeavors. Would of cost them less in £'s than the fallout cost will be for how bad United handled this situation.

I don't think Arnold said he was cleared of all charges, just that all charges were dropped. I maybe wrong though , just haven't been able to find that in his statement

Let's be clear on one thing, if the pictures and the tape are real and an actual reflection on what happened, then Greenwood should never play for United again. But I can't be sure if they are or not because we haven't been given all the facts. One of the reasons the CPS drops the case is because of new evidence coming to light, but they don't tell you what that new evidence is. The club in their statement seem to be saying that they believe he has been falsely accused and the photos and the audio clip are not the whole story. Richard Arnold has said that United were provided with alternative explanations for the audio recording which was a short excerpt from a much longer recording and for the images posted online. But he doesn't provide the information he was given. ( I understand there are legal reasons why, by why mention them) . The main reason for United releasing him looks to be that they are trying to protect the brand, and perhaps to protect Greenwood from the abuse he would get in England.

I don't understand this decision, makes no sense to me. In United's statement they say based on the evidence available to us, we have concluded that the material posted online did not provide a full picture and that Mason did not commit the offences in respect of which he was originally charged. If the club feel he didn't commit the offences, then they should stand by him. If what was posted online did not provide the full picture, then give us the full picture, so we can fully understand this decision. Otherwise, it looks like Greenwood has been convicted in the court of public opinion and the club are more concerned with any likely backlash than the well being of a player who has been with the club since he was 7.

8 33

Caicedo looked like he wasn't match fit. He didn't play much for Brighton pre season and it showed today.

Think Spurs could have had a penalty there. Ref terrible fir both sides.

There's the first call against United for the Onana decision, definite handball in the box.