Blocks for playing for United

Rio & Cantona shouldn't be included here.

For giggs, I think had he been playing today, he would've ended up with a suspension as well. Times have changed, and you don't get away with these things easily these days. Celebrities are getting canceled left and right for things they've done in the past.

I think people are more forgiving if you were not set out to hurt someone else, for example if a player loses his way to drugs but manages to recover, I'd happily welcome him back at the club. But I think the line will always be drawn at things like domestic abuse or sexual assaults, because it leaves a bad taste and your image is tarnished forever.
 
Rio and Cantona absolutely do not belong in this dicussion.

Greenwood and Giggs... The less said the better. The difference is that Giggs's behaviour became public knowledge once he was basically retired. In hindsight, I would have preferred a Greenwood-like scenario, meaning true face comes out early and the player is sacked before getting a chance to build so many memories that would cause mixed feelings in the future, as is the case with Giggs now.
 
Oranges038 said:
Yes, he probably was. But, don't you know, it was different times and he was a bit of a rogue but also deep down he was a good lad, he just had a problem with the drink.......

Giggs did more and won more the club than Best. Yet, I doubt anyone would want a statue of him outside the stadium or an airport in Wales named after him based on his recent actions.
Click to expand...

Maybe the club should remove the statue of George Best and Belfast change the airport name. I doubt that will happen though.
 
Last edited:
Someone said:
Rio & Cantona shouldn't be included here.

For giggs, I think had he been playing today, he would've ended up with a suspension as well. Times have changed, and you don't get away with these things easily these days. Celebrities are getting canceled left and right for things they've done in the past.

I think people are more forgiving if you were not set out to hurt someone else, for example if a player loses his way to drugs but manages to recover, I'd happily welcome him back at the club. But I think the line will always be drawn at things like domestic abuse or sexual assaults, because it leaves a bad taste and your image is tarnished forever.
Click to expand...

Yeah

like Rooney and the granny Hookers.. it hurt his wife but nobody else and she forgave him

basically there's no second chances in life these days for domestic or sexual assault abusers. That's the current climate we are in. Whether that's right or wrong there's no rehabilitation and way back for those people if they want to become better people. You are banished forever.

i always believed if a person goes prison, serves the time and comes back.. they deserve a second chance in life especially if they have shown remorse, done rehabilitation etc. But that's not how todays cutthroat World works. You are basically dead in todays World if you do domestic or sexual abuse. You can't make amends no matter what you do.

like for example a person can do 1 drunken mistake on a night out when they are young and the career and lives are over forever. No way back. I don't know if I agree with that especially if they have paid with prison etc I think in that scenario that person deserves a second chance in life. But in todays Unforgiving World that's not possible.
 
Last edited:
I really don't care about someone's personal life unless it affects the club's performance. If we go by this judgemental route then people like Gandhi, Teresa, MLK, Churchill, Jefferson, numerous African/Asian freedom fighters, can all be judged as unsavory characters.
I don't think society will have many models to follow - especially for PoC like me.
Lets just look at their net impact on our happiness - I mean how many of you have gone into depression after hearing about Giggs' troubles? Does it impact your love for United? Have United's previous wins been tarnished as unfair?
 
Oranges038 said:
Don't think people should still need this explained.

It's less than 20 years since he beat his wife and left her in hospital. Other than he was just your average alcoholic domestic abuser for most of his life.

Great player, total cnut.



He deserves to be included.

What's different between him beating his wife/partner, cheating on her and Giggs doing it?
Click to expand...

Well I think there are a few things that seperate George's relationship with Alex Best and someone who is attacking his wife/girlfriend in a premeditated, consistent manner.

From what I understand their relationship was a violent one. There was violence on both sides. Both were addicts. Him alcohol and her cocaine. There's also plenty of talk about her having a drink problem. She's been convicted of drink driving. She drank in front of him. You do get these type of toxic relationships where both individuals are mutually destructive. It's not pretty. Not that it excuses the man.

There's also the alcoholism factor. He was a severely ill and diseased man. As bad an alcoholic as you might find. When that disease kicks in you're talking about a mentally unhinged man. It's a complicating factor if you're trying to draw a line on what's acceptable and what's not.

Sober he was by all accounts a very nice guy. She says the same. She's on record as saying she loved their relationship despite the booze and violence. She won't drop his name but some want the airport to.

This is quite different to the guy who is nasty to his core, abusing and beating his wife for no other reason than he feels like it. Year after year caudong abject misery just because he can.

I'm not saying this as a complete defense of Best. He was clearly a very flawed man. I just don't believe everyone should be put in the same bracket.

It's why I have sympathy with Collymore. He was wrong. But decades on he's still being tarred with the same brush as the worst kinds of domestic abusers. Which he wasn't/isn't.

This is one of those discusions that's difficult. I think you can differentiate between cases and in some instances allow some mitigation or maybe even forgive. There's utility in that. It's healthy.

Then there are cases where that's clearly not possible.

That's my take but I know plenty would feel there is zero room for manoeuvre on this issue.
 
Last edited:
Tbh the details regarding Rio are so long ago that I barely remember them. A more recent example regarding drugs issues would be Fred, who we signed despite him having been banned for a year after testing positive for a masking agent. I would generally be against signing people like that but not so much that's I'm particularly outraged once they're here. It just stopped me from really warming to him that much.

Cantona I don't have that much issue with at all.. If another one of our players did that now I'd call them an idiot and fully support them getting hit with a heavy ban but I certainly wouldn't want them sold unless they seriously hurt someone.

Sexual assault and violence towards women I'd be much stronger against. Basically if I believe they did it, I wouldn't want them here. In Ronaldo's case I believe he likely committed rape and if it was up to me we wouldn't have signed him again, particularly given he still had legal action pending. I don't want anything to do with Giggs any more either. The fact that the latter was in the director's box for the former's return was a bad, bad look for the club.
 
Giggs is a vile man and as far as I'm concerned he destroyed his legacy with his disgusting behaviour.

I'd prefer if Ronaldo wasn't associated with United too.
 
SonyaCross493 said:
People always forget the Van Persie allegations, but he was cleared too. Didn't stop everyone cheering and putting him on a pedestal when he won the league for us. Which fair enough he was cleared in court so was innocent.

Ronaldo was cleared as innocent too and deserves to be treated and given the same benefit of the doubt as Van Persie not just because he's a better footballer but because both of the cases are the same and they was both deemed innocent by criminal courts. And afterwards the Club made Van Persie the face of the club etc and posted on social media all the time

so I don't know why people are getting the knickers in a twist over the club treating Ronaldo the same as Van Persie. Is it because Ronaldo is more famous and high profile because he's GOAT? Or it's after MeToo?! That's not his fault he's done all he can do to clear his name. Sadly women lie and make things up for extortion too especially against famous people and they don't get more famous than Ronaldo. You can't believe an unproven allegation which the court already dismissed without the level of evidence we have seen in the Greenwood case for example.
Click to expand...

I mean, this is categorically false. The suit against him was dismissed on procedural grounds, he wasn't even found to be not guilty let alone "innocent". And the fact remains that he has avoided setting foot in America for years now to avoid the civil suit leveled against him, to the point where he avoided preseason matches for Juve there.

The rest of your post is an absolute trainwreck which I'll leave to the mods. In the slim chance you are capable of a modicum of self-reflection, I hope you have a word with yourself.
 
Last edited:
Oranges038 said:
What's different between him beating his wife/partner, cheating on her and Giggs doing it?
Click to expand...

For what it's worth these are two very different things. I wouldn't mix moral issues and illegalities.

If one of our player hits the form of his life because he's eyeing some side-chick I couldn't care less, but there's a very clear line with regards to violence.

I haven't read too much into the current case Giggs is in, but the Rhodri stuff didn't (and still doesn't) bother me at all.
 
Marwood said:
Well I think there are a few things that seperate George's relationship with Alex Best and someone who is attacking his wife/girlfriend in a premeditated, consistent manner.

From what I understand their relationship was a violent one. There was violence on both sides. Both were addicts. Him alcohol and her cocaine. There's also plenty of talk about her having a drink problem. She's been convicted of drink driving. She drank in front of him. You do get these type of toxic relationships where both individuals are mutually destructive. It's not pretty. Not that it excuses the man.

There's also the alcoholism factor. He was a severely ill and diseased man. As bad an alcoholic as you might find. When that disease kicks in you're talking about a mentally unhinged man. It's a complicating factor if you're trying to draw a line on what's acceptable and what's not.

Sober he was by all accounts a very nice guy. She says the same. She's on record as saying she loved their relationship despite the booze and violence. She won't drop his name but some want the airport to.

This is quite different to the guy who is nasty to his core, abusing and beating his wife for no other reason than he feels like it. Year after year caudong abject misery just because he can.

I'm not saying this as a complete defense of Best. He was clearly a very flawed man. I just don't believe everyone should be put in the same bracket.

It's why I have sympathy with Collymore. He was wrong. But decades on he's still being tarred with the same brush as the worst kinds of domestic abusers. Which he wasn't/isn't.

This is one of those discusions that's difficult. I think you can differentiate between cases and in some instances allow some mitigation or maybe even forgive. There's utility in that. It's healthy.

Then there are cases where that's clearly not possible.

That's my take but I know plenty would feel there is zero room for manoeuvre on this issue.
Click to expand...

I'm not too up on the Collymore stuff, I'd have to read up on it again..

For Best, by all accounts there are reports that he was like this in other relationships before Alex and other rumours about his time in America. He would disappear for weeks, go on benders leaving his wife and son in the dark about where he was.

Best was given every chance, he got a transplant that could have been given to someone who might not have gone on drinking anyway. He did and it killed him.

I wouldn't be one for saying it's because he has a drink problem and he's only like that when he's drunk and using it as an excuse, because he's a nice guy otherwise. He could have just stopped drinking then maybe he wouldn't have been such a cnut.

I am aware of someone who is like this, from what I gather the guy is apparently an ok person most of the time, he goes to work, all the usual stuff. But, some days he starts drinking and by evening, he's beating the piss out of his partner and kicking her out of the house in the middle of the night. To me that means he's a piece of shit, if he can't control himself after a few drinks then he shouldn't drink.

Same as for Best, he drank too much. He beat his wife. He was a piece of shit.
 
SonyaCross493 said:
Yeah

like Rooney and the granny Hookers.. it hurt his wife but nobody else and she forgave him

basically there's no second chances in life these days for domestic or sexual assault abusers. That's the current climate we are in. Whether that's right or wrong there's no rehabilitation and way back for those people if they want to become better people. You are banished forever.

i always believed if a person goes prison, serves the time and comes back.. they deserve a second chance in life especially if they have shown remorse, done rehabilitation etc. But that's not how todays cutthroat World works. You are basically dead in todays World if you do domestic or sexual abuse. You can't make amends no matter what you do.

like for example a person can do 1 drunken mistake on a night out when they are young and the career and lives are over forever. No way back. I don't know if I agree with that especially if they have paid with prison etc I think in that scenario that person deserves a second chance in life. But in todays Unforgiving World that's not possible.
Click to expand...
You have to keep in mind that people aren't saying they should be locked up forever or should get the death sentence... What it is is that they should 100% be cancelled from fame, big riches, being looked at as an idol, representing a football club, playing football for a living, etc. There is almost always the chance for redemption in life. Like you said, serve your time, and commit the rest of your time to make amends, make the world a better place. But your time as a star is done. For that, there is absolutely just 1 chance. They had a chance at fame, a dream job, riches nobody could imagine, and then used their position to abuse someone else. They don't get to start from 0 and be able to work their way back to the top again. They don't get to pick up where they left off, because actions have consequences that people have to live with. Their life isn't over, just their life in the limelight is.
 
Oranges038 said:
I'm not too up on the Collymore stuff, I'd have to read up on it again..

For Best, by all accounts there are reports that he was like this in other relationships before Alex and other rumours about his time in America. He would disappear for weeks, go on benders leaving his wife and son in the dark about where he was.

Best was given every chance, he got a transplant that could have been given to someone who might not have gone on drinking anyway. He did and it killed him.

I wouldn't be one for saying it's because he has a drink problem and he's only like that when he's drunk and using it as an excuse, because he's a nice guy otherwise. He could have just stopped drinking then maybe he wouldn't have been such a cnut.

I am aware of someone who is like this, from what I gather the guy is apparently an ok person most of the time, he goes to work, all the usual stuff. But, some days he starts drinking and by evening, he's beating the piss out of his partner and kicking her out of the house in the middle of the night. To me that means he's a piece of shit, if he can't control himself after a few drinks then he shouldn't drink.

Same as for Best, he drank too much. He beat his wife. He was a piece of shit.
Click to expand...

You don't seem to believe in addiction because that's the very opposite of what it is. You've also gloased right over what I said about their relationship, her own issues. You're right he was a crap husband, a crap dad. But he also destroyed his own life. It's what addiction does.

Like I said for some, including myself, there can sometimes be differences, some nuance. For others there can't be.

I can think of Best as two separate people. There's the guy upto his mid 20's,an icon, and there's the guy after that when the addiction really took hold.

But it's tricky stuff so I totally get the polarised opinions.
 
PSV said:
For what it's worth these are two very different things. I wouldn't mix moral issues and illegalities.

If one of our player hits the form of his life because he's eyeing some side-chick I couldn't care less, but there's a very clear line with regards to violence.

I haven't read too much into the current case Giggs is in, but the Rhodri stuff didn't (and still doesn't) bother me at all.
Click to expand...
I think he meant to say what's the difference in Best both beating and cheating on his partner, and Giggs allegedly doing both with his partners as well. Don't think he was saying the crimes are equivalent, but that the crimes both people committed were equivalent.
 
ronaldinhoisagoat said:
I really don't care about someone's personal life unless it affects the club's performance. If we go by this judgemental route then people like Gandhi, Teresa, MLK, Churchill, Jefferson, numerous African/Asian freedom fighters, can all be judged as unsavory characters.
I don't think society will have many models to follow - especially for PoC like me.
Lets just look at their net impact on our happiness - I mean how many of you have gone into depression after hearing about Giggs' troubles? Does it impact your love for United? Have United's previous wins been tarnished as unfair?
Click to expand...
Woof.
It's a football club. The players represent the club. Kids inevitably look up to footballers. Surely you can put your own selfish wants to the side and understand what is morally right or wrong? Would you be ok with a team full of murderers, domestic abusers and rapists if it meant we won the title? Because that's essentially what you're saying...
 
SonyaCross493 said:
yeah wasn't Best a proven wbeater?

also unsavoury rumours about when he played in America..

Probably Best was worst of the lot yet nobody mentions it as much as Giggs etc they only mention the legendary player. Romanticism.

also Dwight Yorke refusing to see his disabled son.

Rashford apparently cheated on his girlfriend with 2 women and she caught them in bed..

not every footballer can be Juan Mata sadly
Click to expand...
What the hell why would you even compare this with the others? An athlete cheating on his girlfriend isn't a crime, it's a personal relationship issue that the 2 people have to deal with and literally nothing else. It's not in the same world as domestic abuse, rape claims, etc.

Also since you've brought up Van Persie a few times. Read up on it. The case was dismissed relatively quickly, Van Persie was proven to not have assaulted her, and the girl literally admitted that she fabricated the story. So please stop comparing that to the Ronaldo story. Rabid fans reaching for every excuse is why women like Mayorga find it so difficult to come out against star athletes when something happens.
 
Last edited:
bosnian_red said:
Woof.
It's a football club. The players represent the club. Kids inevitably look up to footballers. Surely you can put your own selfish wants to the side and understand what is morally right or wrong? Would you be ok with a team full of murderers, domestic abusers and rapists if it meant we won the title? Because that's essentially what you're saying...
Click to expand...

I don't think that's what the poster is saying.

They don't care what happens in the players personal life. If they cheat, if they're a good dad etc.

Just a guess but I doubt the poster is cool with murderers just because they won us a cup.
 
Marwood said:
I don't think that's what the poster is saying.

They don't care what happens in the players personal life. If they cheat, if they're a good dad etc.

Just a guess but I doubt the poster is cool with murderers just because they won us a cup.
Click to expand...
I mean he literally used Giggs as an example of him not caring about what he does in his personal life and how it doesn't tarnish United's past wins...
 
Not really relevant, but I was just thinking this. Are we going to see Greenwood erased from all highlight videos - like United usually release 'all goals scored this season' videos and similar content. Do we think any goals scored by him won't be used. Or goals assisted?
 
George Best is the reason why players like the class of 92 were managed in a specific way.

Best was the example for all the young players that came after.

The class of 92 were the example of what was to come after them.

Obviously not all of them made the right choices.

Re Best,

The 1960s and early 70s were a different time, especially with regards to how women were regarded, probably why it wasn't more highlighted.

Kinda like how Sean Connery beat his first wife but was adored by everyone.

In 2000s onwards there is zero tolerance for this kind of behaviour and hearing the latest from the police statement, its sickening this treatment of women is still so apparent in todays society, especially in the younger generation and all age groups as well for that matter.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
I mean, this is categorically false. The suit against him was dismissed on procedural grounds, he wasn't even found to be not guilty let alone "innocent". And the fact remains that he has avoided setting foot in America for years now to avoid the civil suit leveled against him, to the point where he avoided preseason matches for Juve there.

The rest of your post is an absolute trainwreck which I'll leave to the mods. In the slim chance you are capable of a modicum of self-reflection, I hope you have a word with yourself.
Click to expand...
I did not know these details. Now you kind of ruined how I feel about Ronaldo. It almost went from GOAT to d*ck.
 
Marwood said:
You don't seem to believe in addiction because that's the very opposite of what it is. You've also gloased right over what I said about their relationship, her own issues. You're right he was a crap husband, a crap dad. But he also destroyed his own life. It's what addiction does.

Like I said for some, including myself, there can sometimes be differences, some nuance. For others there can't be.

I can think of Best as two separate people. There's the guy upto his mid 20's,an icon, and there's the guy after that when the addiction really took hold.

But it's tricky stuff so I totally get the polarised opinions.
Click to expand...

I don't buy addiction as an excuse for beating on your wife. It's the excuse that always gets poured out for Best, it was different times, he was different when he wasn't driniking etc etc. It's less than 20 years since he put her in hospital. There were also other claims a while back, that she liked it and put in for it, that she got off on it to some extent.

Maybe they were bad for each other and it maybe did go both ways. But he was an abusive drunk to others before her and had she left him, he probably would have gone and done it to someone else.

I can separate them too, both he and Giggs were great players. I don't hold them to different standards when it comes to hitting women whether they are an addict or not.
 
Last edited:
Red Rash said:
I don't really know exactly where the line is but I would say:

  • Rio took the test the next day and passed, stupid of him but not a drug cheat
  • Cantona kicked a racist fan which I can forgive
  • Ronaldo I don't know the case that well but if they are just allegations and he hasn't been found guilty you have to give him the benefit of the doubt
  • In the case of Giggs this happened after his playing career. If he was still playing I wouldn't want him at the club
Click to expand...

Once the Giggs case reaches its conclusion, if he is found to be in the wrong I certainly think he should be stripped of his Sports Personality of the Year award (and the freedom of the city of Salford award from 2010).
 
Oranges038 said:
I don't buy addiction as an excuse for beating on your wife. It's the excuse that always gets poured out for Best, it was different times, he was different when he wasn't driniking etc etc. It's less than 20 years since he put her in hospital. There were also other claims a while back, that she liked it and put in for it, that she got off on it to some extent.

Maybe they were bad for each other and it maybe did go both ways. But he was an abusive drunk to others before her and had she left him, he probably would have gone and done it to someone else.

I can separate them too, both he and Giggs were great players. I don't hold them to different standards when it comes to hitting women whether they are an addict or not.
Click to expand...

You don't buy addiction at all if you think a person can just stop.

It's unfair to characterise him as forever violent. His first wife, along with Alex, speaks very fondly of him. This is what I mean by just blasting public figures, characterising all as the same. Not for me.
 
Last edited:
Most people are flawed to some degree. In the moment terrible things can happen which may not reflect who they are on a daily basis.

I love Cantona for his flaws as his actions carried some virtue.

Best I sympathize with as he clearly had demons. But he took them to his grave and never faced them. If you look at an interview with Calum, he scarred him - he clearly loves his dad, but he was emotionally abused by him.

for that alone, Best should be at the top of these conversations.
 
Houdini said:
I did not know these details. Now you kind of ruined how I feel about Ronaldo. It almost went from GOAT to d*ck.
Click to expand...

Whilst I apologise for any distress I've inflicted mate, the fact that you were able to reconsider how you feel about someone who you have huge emotional stakes should be a massive feather in your cap (and honestly is something I aspire to do with more regularity!)
 
Should there really be different rules for football clubs as opposed to any other business?

Any act that reflects badly on the organisation (making racist comments, etc) or is outright illegal should be enough to get kicked out.

Obviously the public will rightly view a rapist differently from a guy who was caught with a gram of coke, but from the club's point of view, there's not much difference imo.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Was he addicted to beating on his wife? Or are you trying to say that because he was an addict all his unacceptable behaviour should be overlooked?
Click to expand...

If you read my posts in full you already know the answer to that question. Of course not.
 
UnitedFire said:
Rio failed to turn up for a drugs test and was banned, but still was a United legend.

Cantona fly kicked a twat fan, was banned but still came back to be a legend.

Giggs was a legend, but has tarnished that for various reasons, some of which we shouldn't comment on at this point.

Ronaldo serious allegations, but not convicted.

Where do you draw the line on a player continuing to play for us?

We can't comment on current ongoing matters, but no reason we cant have a theoretical debate of similar scenarios or on reflection of cases no longer ongoing.

So a player commits a serious crime, but might get away with it on lack of evidence, but enough suggestions to draw your own conclusions... Player continue or not?

In Ronaldo case it can't be proven beyond reasonable doubt so seems he is allowed reasonable allowances.

There could be a case like Julian Assange where time expiring covers them, but little doubt left.

It does feel like too many allowances are given to superstars generally, e.g. Tyson probably should not be allowed on TV any more given convicted rapist.
Click to expand...
Everyone can do mistakes, but when people start acting like psychopaths, that´s where the line goes for me.
 
Botim said:
Should there really be different rules for football clubs as opposed to any other business?

Any act that reflects badly on the organisation (making racist comments, etc) or is outright illegal should be enough to get kicked out.

Obviously the public will rightly view a rapist differently from a guy who was caught with a gram of coke, but from the club's point of view, there's not much difference imo.
Click to expand...

Given that we are sometimes dealing with kids and teenagers in football there should probably be a little more room for mistakes than in other businesses.

An 18 year old talent making a mistake should be treated differently than a 30 year old professional making the same mistakes IMO. Exceptions obviously exist, and without putting too fine a point on it we recently saw something that should disqualify you regardless of age.

However, football puts a hell of a lot of money in the hands of stupid impressionable young men, who will do a lot of stupid things. They will drive their cars too fast, they will smuggle girls into player hotel rooms, they will get into trouble, might buy drugs, get into fights and make stupid mistakes, lash out at fans or say something stupid and/or racist - it is kinda inevitable. Shutting the door completely for teenagers and young adults from coming back from mistakes - even if they are illegal - seems a bit unfair.
 
Oranges038 said:
Don't think people should still need this explained.

It's less than 20 years since he beat his wife and left her in hospital. Other than he was just your average alcoholic domestic abuser for most of his life.

Great player, total cnut.
Click to expand...

Well obvioisly they do mate when you label someone as the biggest cnut of the lot with no further context. Especially considering the recent allegations against a player.
 
SonyaCross493 said:
You are basically dead in todays World if you do domestic or sexual abuse. You can't make amends no matter what you do.

like for example a person can do 1 drunken mistake on a night out when they are young and the career and lives are over forever. No way back.
Click to expand...
You know how many times I’ve been drunk with friends and not committed rape or beat a woman? Every single time. It’s crazy how that works. I’ve got no sympathy for them.
 
Oranges038 said:
I don't buy addiction as an excuse for beating on your wife. It's the excuse that always gets poured out for Best, it was different times, he was different when he wasn't driniking etc etc. It's less than 20 years since he put her in hospital. There were also other claims a while back, that she liked it and put in for it, that she got off on it to some extent.

Maybe they were bad for each other and it maybe did go both ways. But he was an abusive drunk to others before her and had she left him, he probably would have gone and done it to someone else.

I can separate them too, both he and Giggs were great players. I don't hold them to different standards when it comes to hitting women whether they are an addict or not.
Click to expand...
It was a suggestion Celia Walden put forward with no evidence when she was trying to sell her book. Alex Best sued the publishers.
Acceptance of these tropes about domestic abuse is one of the reasons conviction rates are so low.
 
McGrathsipan said:
What is United and why is it to be treated like any other work place?

The old days of club and community and representing your badge and your team are gone, replaced by footballers playing for money for a business that will pay them the most. The idea of the modern "united" being a stand up football club true to its roots is just madness at this point.

The question is about what is the acceptable Behaviour of an employee and when some types of behaviour have obviously crossed a line then its obvious what the company should do.
Each case of misconduct must be investigated, facts established and then action taken based on the company policy and contract of employment etc.

Its not some romantic old "we're Man United" and we do things for purity.

Modern footballers are not one bit attracted to old fashioned club heritage
Click to expand...

This is very true. Behind the history, charm and fan fanaticism, United are a business and like any corporation, there will be consequences if contractual obligations are breeched through conduct.
 
My lines:

Domestic violence - contract terminated

Drink driving - sold as soon as possible, without playing for the club again

Rape allegations that seem to be in a legal grey area - would not buy such a player. If currently at the club, would attempt to sell as soon as possible

Served a suspension for taking banned substances - would not buy such a player.

I'd also have clauses in all contracts, stipulating that if found guilty of x,y,z then 3/4 of salary paid during contract to date, has to be repaid. Likewise for manager, if any of his players found guilty, though 1/3 of salary in that case.
 
Red Rash said:
I don't really know exactly where the line is but I would say:

  • Rio took the test the next day and passed, stupid of him but not a drug cheat
  • Cantona kicked a racist fan which I can forgive
  • Ronaldo I don't know the case that well but if they are just allegations and he hasn't been found guilty you have to give him the benefit of the doubt
  • In the case of Giggs this happened after his playing career. If he was still playing I wouldn't want him at the club
Click to expand...
It was a disgrace Rio was banned and a stain on his name that’s still mentioned over a decade later. City player did the same and got a fine.
Bad mouthed his mother and his nationality. Nothing racist in it at all.
 
Marwood said:
You don't buy addiction at all if you think a person can just stop.

It's unfair to characterise him as forever violent. His first wife, along with Alex, speaks very fondly of him. This is what I mean by just blasting public figures, characterising all as the same. Not for me.
Click to expand...

From anything that I've read and seen, they reflect more in sadness than fondness of their time with him.

If it turns out Giggs was addicted to sex and controlling women, would it be an ok excuse for his behaviour and getting off with his brothers wife?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.