2023 - 2024 Football Thread - Page 11

On August 21 2023 23:05 evilfatsh1t wrote:
in other news united has just released their announcement on greenwood. seems like theyll send him out on loan before bringing him back into the first team, which is what i expected.

statement is a bit vague though. i read it as a loan move but maybe its a mutual termination?

edit: seems the media is certain that its a contract termination situation. in that case the parties have obviously come to some mutual agreement so theres no concern for any legal problem but i think the end result is one of the worst possible outcomes. they sat on this decision for this long only to straight up defend greenwood in their statement but at the same time release him from the club? what a fking shambles. if youre going to go as far as publicly defending him then just keep him and play him. who are they pleasing by releasing him yet defending his actions? the club is absolutely spineless

On August 21 2023 22:25 sharkie wrote:
Value for sponsors come from viewership. Women's world cup does obviously not draw the same amount of viewership but that article claiming that its a fraction from what the men are drawing is ridicilous

By Friday late afternoon, a backlash across season-ticket holders, fans, supporters’ groups, members of parliament and even charities that support female victims of abuse had combined to force a rethink.

That same evening, United’s most senior decision-makers engaged in crisis meetings. Very quickly, despite a plan for reintegration that had gone through more than a dozen iterations, the only questions that remained centred on the next steps as United weighed up an exit strategy.

They debated whether to loan out or sell Greenwood, or attempt to cut ties with the 21-year-old altogether — though this would present legal challenges given the club do not consider, following the findings of an internal investigation, that they have grounds to terminate his contract. In the end, the club confirmed on Monday that they would work with the player to continue his career elsewhere and the club say they do not expect an eventuality where a loan move leads to the player representing United again in the future.

A loan move away from the club would allow United to retain commercial control of a footballer who, before his arrest in January 2022, was widely deemed to be the best young forward in English football. This would either be with a view to selling Greenwood further down the line if he can restore his value on the field, or, hypothetically, to one day bring him back to Old Trafford, but the club insist they do not expect this to happen.

Talks culminated in a U-turn as the public pressure surrounding the decision became intolerable for some of the club’s most senior executives. Many people will wonder if United’s final decision has been made based on public backlash or because they came to reflect that the initial decision communicated by Arnold to the executive leadership was misguided. Arnold said his “view evolved as the process progressed” and claimed he was “taking various factors and views into account right up until the point of finalising my decision.”

United would have been wary of issuing a statement on Saturday because the men’s first team had a Premier League fixture against Tottenham Hotspur, while Sunday morning and early afternoon were ruled out so as not to deflect attention from the Women’s World Cup final between England and Spain — featuring Manchester United players Mary Earps, Ella Toone and Katie Zelem.

United may also have been wary of delaying their statement beyond Monday afternoon given the topic was increasingly likely to be discussed on Sky Sports’ flagship show Monday Night Football. United were aware that influential pundit and former United captain Gary Neville was opposed to the decision.

Manchester United said on Monday afternoon: “All those involved, including Mason, recognise the difficulties with him recommencing his career at Manchester United. It has therefore been mutually agreed that it would be most appropriate for him to do so away from Old Trafford, and we will now work with Mason to achieve that outcome.”

While the nature of the cases are very different, comparisons will be made between the manner in which United, under the Glazer family, also secretly planned to join the European Super League in April 2021, only to U-turn on the outcome amid public outcry.

It seems it has happened again with Mason Greenwood.

On August 22 2023 05:28 zev318 wrote:
also depends on demographics, like i would say its safe to assume the majority of the viewers that watched the final are female (or at the very least a higher ratio vs a men's final). men just has less interest obviously. so sponsors that aim at male viewership would not sponsor or pay much less vs a mens final.

i did not watch any of the women matches, but it would be very interesting to have seen what type of commercials were played.

ppl always outrage at this female male pay stuff, but ive never seen anyone outrage at female supermodels making probably 100s if not 1000s times that a male model ever could.

On August 22 2023 20:03 WombaT wrote:

None if you were in the U.K. as they were broadcast on the BBC which is state funded and doesn’t run ads. So you’re limited to the advertising hoardings on the side of the pitch and other sponsors that are visible in the stadium.

Equal pay in the club sphere is to me pretty daft, there’s no commercial argument for it whatsoever.

In terms of the national team, where it’s really not about, or at least shouldn’t be about profits, but about glory and the pursuit of excellence I think it sends an important symbolic message that there’s some parity. Similarly in Olympic funding, I mean we could prioritise popular sports but that’s not really what the Olympics are about.

I don’t believe they’re alone in doing this, although not sure but the England men’s team has donated their national team appearance/call-up fees to charities for years now. It’s such small fry compared to their actual wage packets. With the women it would be a more impactful top-up to their regular wage and it’s a bit of a kick in the teeth if you weren’t to equalise with the men who literally don’t need it and give it away.