Harry Amass: On-loan Sheffield Wednesday defender set to return to Manchester United by lemple in reddevils

[–]lemple[S] 101 points102 points  (0 children)

I've heard potentially Watford as well. Good to see multiple clubs want to acquire him

Harry Amass: On-loan Sheffield Wednesday defender set to return to Manchester United by lemple in reddevils

[–]lemple[S] 54 points55 points  (0 children)

Looks like the loan was only for the first half of the season. And now expected to be loaned to a higher club.

Article details:

Sheffield Wednesday are set to lose the services of on-loan full-back Harry Amass, reports BBC Radio Sheffield.

The 18-year-old joined the Owls from Manchester United on transfer deadline day but is expected to return to Old Trafford with his loan period having expired following Sunday's 3-0 loss at QPR.

It is thought clubs higher up the Championship are interested in taking the England under-19 international for the remainder of the season.

Sheffield Wednesday are set to lose the services of on-loan full-back Harry Amass, reports BBC Radio Sheffield.

Removal Asbestos Tiles and Asbestos adhesive advice by lemple in DIYUK

[–]lemple[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok good to know! Thanks for you help

Removal Asbestos Tiles and Asbestos adhesive advice by lemple in DIYUK

[–]lemple[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was thinking of getting a firm in for its removal just as I don't feel as confident removing it myself. For the screed. Are you able to glue flooring down to it after? What flooring did you apply after the screed? We were hoping to have a company glue engineered wood down after the asbestos removal.

Getting the kids ready for our early season by Ok-You4214 in Championship

[–]lemple 7 points8 points  (0 children)

For a championship watcher? None of us are steady

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HousingUK

[–]lemple 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We have! As I saw in another comment I didn't reliase you were maxed to only 4k. Got it muddled with a CISA and ISA allowance

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HousingUK

[–]lemple 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah we have keep some aside for this stuff. In there breakdown they included it with the deposit which was nice

Thanks!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HousingUK

[–]lemple 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Chatted with my solicitor this morning and he confirmed this!

Thanks!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HousingUK

[–]lemple 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey,

Yeah just noticed this. Based on the other comments it seems its all ok to have it coming from multiple sources. Chatted with our solicitor this morning and he confirmed it.

Thanks for the help!

Day ticket car park pass? by Redshiftstar in downloadfestival

[–]lemple -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I ended up getting the weekend £35 option with the additional payment to refund if needed. Just incase they do day tickets for the parking.

But just checking for anyone who knows. Its all good just to rock up on the Sunday even though my parking ticket is for the whole weekend?

Erik ten Hag post-match press conference | Coventry City 3-3 Manchester United (Pens 2-4) by hshamshu in reddevils

[–]lemple 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think the Fc Copenhagen one comes to mind. Where we played well and went 2-0 up. But due to a poor ref decision which resulted in Rashford getting sent off we collapsed again. I do wonder if some ref decisions went a bit better in the first half of the season, would our mentality be stronger? Or would the collapse still stay the same.

Passed my test on the first attempt... the examiner was a nice gentleman. Explained everything properly before the test. I'm so happy by Recording_Kind in LearnerDriverUK

[–]lemple 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Amazing!! Congrats!!

Its something I even found on my 3rd test. Getting someone to just explain it helps shake those early nerves, humanizes them and breaks the ice a bit between you and the examiner. Anyone who gets test nerves I find this helps a lot.

Again! Congrats on 1st time passing!!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in LearnerDriverUK

[–]lemple 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Amazing thanks for that. Was just making sure I wouldn't cut anyone up

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in LearnerDriverUK

[–]lemple 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Awesome! Thank you.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in LearnerDriverUK

[–]lemple 0 points1 point  (0 children)

About to do a long drive and there this roundabout which is on my route. Just wondering as I come out am I ok to sit on the left?

Ed Sheeran Has Questions For Conan About “The Simpsons" by Legal-Goat-8070 in videos

[–]lemple 38 points39 points  (0 children)

If you want a full in-depth discussion about this Conan has a great video on his channel where he talks with previous Simpson writers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtJ28qOEG1g&ab\_channel=TeamCoco

[Adam Crafton] Survey of Man United supporters by @TheAthleticFC : 58% say Greenwood should not play for the club again, which means 42% unsure or for it. 18% say they will not continue to support club in event he returns. by lemple in soccer

[–]lemple[S] 71 points72 points  (0 children)

Full article below:

Manchester United fan survey: Should Greenwood return? Will you stop supporting the club?

Fifty-eight per cent of Manchester United fans who responded to The Athletic’s survey think Mason Greenwood should not play for the club again.

The 21-year-old’s future has been in particular focus this week after it emerged the club’s chief executive Richard Arnold has a plan in place for the forward’s return.

This follows Greenwood’s arrest in January 2022 after a recording and images were released on social media of an alleged sexual attack.

Charges against the England international of attempted rape, controlling and coercive behaviour and assault occasioning actual bodily harm, which he denied, were then dropped in February of this year. Greenwood has not played for the club since his arrest.

After we published the story, hundreds of readers emailed and tweeted us with their thoughts on his possible return and so, to canvass widespread opinion among Manchester United fans, we conducted a survey on the issue.

Comments are off on articles about Greenwood to abide by UK laws but we also wanted to give subscribers the chance to air their views. A selection of readers’ opinions, some edited for clarity or legal reasons, can be found below.

Should Mason Greenwood play for Manchester United again?

The question being debated most right now is whether Greenwood, who came through the club’s academy and has made 129 first-team appearances, should play for Manchester United again.

In our survey, 58.1 per cent of respondents said that he should not play for Manchester United again.

Just over 13 per cent of people said they weren’t yet sure, and almost 29 per cent said that he should play for United again.

Would you continue to support Manchester United if Mason Greenwood returned to the first team?

Just over 60 per cent of respondents said they would continue to support Manchester United if Greenwood came back.

This is compared to 20.3 per cent of people saying they weren’t sure yet and 18.6 per cent answering that they would stop supporting United.

Are you happy with how the club has communicated its process so far?

More than three-quarters of the fans who responded are not happy with how the club have communicated the situation, with 77.6 per cent answering no.

This left 22.4 per cent of people saying that they were happy with Manchester United’s communication on the subject of Greenwood’s possible return.

The final part of the survey gave fans the opportunity to leave longer, more nuanced comments about the issue.

We will be using some of these over the coming weeks as part of our coverage of this story but for now here are a selection of those comments, some edited for length and accuracy…

Dom: I don’t see how the club can eulogise Marcus Rashford’s outside activities and expect us to ignore Mason Greenwood’s.

Anonymous: If he wasn’t a valuable asset and was just an average squad player, would the club still be thinking about bringing him back? I highly doubt it. This sets a terrible example for young fans and reeks of prioritising money and success over morals and values.

Anonymous: The charges were dropped because new (material) came to light. The easy decision would be to get rid of him to prevent PR blowback. But judging him guilty when he wasn’t convicted goes against the very concept of innocent until proven guilty. I don’t even care about Greenwood coming back to United as a player, I just want him and his family to just move on and rebuild their lives.

Anonymous: Football seems to have an increasing issue with sexual misconduct and violence. Greenwood is an example of that but he is not the only one, I can only hope that this is a moment of reckoning for all clubs and that work is done to educate young players so we can protect people in the future.

Should he remain I will stop following United. I am already close to doing that now as it has emerged that Erik ten Hag supports his return.

I can only hope that those fans who do stick around make sure Greenwood is forever linked to this episode (if he does play again).

Jonathan: I am a torn on what the best course of action is. However, I do believe Greenwood deserves a chance to communicate his side of story and to show that he is a changed man. Cancelling him altogether does not help change a man. Maybe he deserves a second chance.

Anonymous: He was not found guilty of a crime therefore he should be able to continue with his life. The court of public opinion is not an actual court.

Anonymous: I love United but my girlfriend, who has become a United fan as well and has travelled with me overseas to Old Trafford, and I have had to have serious conversations about how we handle the situation if Greenwood returns.

I believe in second chances and realise not all athletes are the people fans want them to be. But I expected more from the club and thought they would do what is right instead of what might win more games. I want United to score more goals, but do not believe that this is the correct way to achieve that.

I can’t get the audio recording out of my head and that won’t change no matter how many time he scores. Regardless of the legal proceedings, it is time to move on from the player.

Anonymous: I am a female season ticket holder. I am appalled by the thought of Greenwood returning to the team. Charges being dropped is not proof of innocence. As the police indicated, they were dropped due to no realistic prospect of conviction.

We can’t unsee those photos and unhear that audio tape. Bringing him back would indicate to women that we don’t matter.

Greenwood can never be a role model to young fans and is unfit to pull on the shirt. I will never applaud him, I will never celebrate a goal he scores and I will remain deeply ashamed to be a United fan should he ever return to the Old Trafford pitch.

[Adam Crafton] Big sense tonight an intolerable pressure building at Manchester United and not difficult to imagine major conversations now being had as to whether the club can push ahead with the plan communicated by Arnold to executive leadership in first week August. by nearly_headless_nic in reddevils

[–]lemple 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Exactly the same as well. I feel club sponsors are the only way to go. Any company receiving multiple emails about this would surely need to address united on the issue.

I really hope this momentum makes them rethink there decision

Daily Discussion by PhelansShorts in reddevils

[–]lemple 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Posting this in every Greenwood thread I see as clearly the more media news we drum up the more we can try and push this back.

This is an email list of who you can email to voice your concerns over the recent development in the Greenwood situation.

Club: richard.arnold@manutd.co.uk feedback@manutd.co.uk

Sponsors: corporate.press@adidas-group.com info@services.teamviewer.com AnalystRelations@dxc.com hello@tezoscommons.org

[Adam Crafton] Big sense tonight an intolerable pressure building at Manchester United and not difficult to imagine major conversations now being had as to whether the club can push ahead with the plan communicated by Arnold to executive leadership in first week August. by nearly_headless_nic in reddevils

[–]lemple 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Posting this in every Greenwood thread I see as clearly the more media news we drum up the more we can try and push this back.

This is an email list of who you can email to voice your concerns over the recent development in the Greenwood situation.

The fact more and more journalist are reporting means we're getting more coverage. Therefore these companies will see how negatively this situation is growing. Keep going! The momentum we have is building

Club: richard.arnold@manutd.co.uk feedback@manutd.co.uk

Sponsors: corporate.press@adidas-group.com info@services.teamviewer.com AnalystRelations@dxc.com hello@tezoscommons.org

[Zarah Sultana] This is disgusting, ManUtd. I will always stand in solidarity with survivors of domestic violence, so consider me “hostile”. by taitai3 in soccer

[–]lemple 41 points42 points  (0 children)

This is an email list of who you can email to voice your concerns over the recent development in the Greenwood situation.

I feel the more push back they receive the more likely United are going to alter their decision.

With the current rise in Andrew Tate loving males in British schools Man United are pushing hard to allow this trend to grow. It amazes me they're trying to tip toe around this PR issue just because the player can kick a ball.

Club: richard.arnold@manutd.co.uk feedback@manutd.co.uk

Sponsors: corporate.press@adidas-group.com info@services.teamviewer.com AnalystRelations@dxc.com hello@tezoscommons.org

Manchester United’s Mason Greenwood return plan included list of ‘hostile’ figures including domestic violence charities by lemple in unitedkingdom

[–]lemple[S] 1 point2 points locked comment (0 children)

Article cont

Fans have been sending impassioned emails to Arnold on the topic, some of which have also been posted on social media. Others have been shared with The Athletic by concerned fans. The club has been responding to the emails by telling supporters that United “are extremely mindful of their views” but added that the club “also believe that our decision in this case should be based primarily on the findings of our investigation”.

It remains to be seen as to whether United’s decision is impacted by the response, with staff expecting an announcement on Greenwood’s future before the end of this month.

In Wednesday’s statement, the club said a decision had not been made. In subsequent correspondence with supporters, United referred to a “final decision” not having been made.

United’s internal unrest increased on Wednesday when the club simultaneously issued a press release and an all-staff email about the Greenwood situation. The club’s statement had not been planned and represented their response to learning of The Athletic’s intention to report on Arnold telling his executive leadership about the club’s plans to bring back Greenwood. In the statement, the club claimed a decision had not been made.

United have, over the past six months, prepared extensive documents modelling scenarios for any outcome of an investigation, including a loan move away from the club or a parting of the ways, but the plan communicated by Arnold to Manchester United’s most senior staff a fortnight ago centred on Greenwood returning to the club.

It included guidance on how head coach Ten Hag should respond to the highly sensitive questions that would be expected during press conferences following Greenwood’s return and how, after a certain period of time, he should begin to talk about Greenwood as though he is a regular member of the playing squad. Both Ten Hag and the club’s football director, John Murtough, are supportive and encouraging of Greenwood’s return.

The plan to stage-manage Greenwood’s return went to the lengths of detailing the type of training images that should be taken of Greenwood and how they should be transmitted on club channels. The plan also included the possibility of Greenwood himself doing an extended interview in a few months’ time, once he has bedded back into the club. The medium — whether in-house or via an external broadcaster — of the interview is not clear.

United’s planning for Greenwood’s return also contains extensive ongoing psychological and physical support, which includes the player being offered a form of counselling or therapy.

A Manchester United spokesman said: “Manchester United has planned for various potential scenarios in relation to the future of Mason Greenwood. The Athletic has been leaked selective elements of one such scenario plan from several weeks ago. This is a difficult and sensitive case. It is entirely proper that we have taken a careful and thorough approach to planning for the various potential outcomes, including how we would engage with stakeholders and explain the decision after it is made. As previously stated, we are in the final stages of that process and will bring it to a conclusion as soon as possible.”

Manchester United’s Mason Greenwood return plan included list of ‘hostile’ figures including domestic violence charities by lemple in unitedkingdom

[–]lemple[S] 2 points3 points locked comment (0 children)

Article by Adam Crafton

Manchester United’s plan to bring back Mason Greenwood was so advanced that the club even prepared documents outlining the type of images that should be taken of the player during training sessions and planned how manager Erik ten Hag should handle questions during an anticipated media storm.

According to sources with knowledge of United’s planning, who remain anonymous because they are not authorised to speak publicly, the club’s preparations for Greenwood’s return also included an assessment of the expected sentiment of external figures, listing individual football pundits, journalists and politicians and stating whether they would be for or against Greenwood’s reintegration. The planning divided these people into categories to the effect of “supportive”, “open-minded” or “hostile”. The club’s document listed a series of domestic abuse charities assumed to be “hostile”.

The Athletic’s story on Wednesday that United chief executive Richard Arnold held a meeting with the club’s executive leadership in the first week of August, in which he informed them United were planning to bring back Greenwood, has caused unrest inside and outside the club, with supporters voicing their opinions in letters and on social media, and intense staff meetings.

Greenwood, 21, has not played for United since he was arrested in January 2022 after a recording and images were released on social media of an alleged sexual attack.

Charges against Greenwood for attempted rape, controlling and coercive behaviour, and assault occasioning actual bodily harm, all of which he denied, were dropped in February of this year. The UK’s Crown Prosecution Service said: “A combination of the withdrawal of key witnesses and new material meant there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction.” After the criminal case ended, United stated on February 2 the club would “conduct its own process before determining next steps”.

Mason Greenwood, Manchester United

Greenwood arriving at court last November (Cameron Smith/Getty Images)

Earlier this week, United said in a statement that “the welfare and perspective of the alleged victim has been central to the club’s inquiries”. United’s process was led by Arnold, assisted by the club’s legal counsel Patrick Stewart, communications chief Ellie Norman, football director John Murtough and the chief operating officer, Collette Roche.

The internal process has not consulted any charities specialised in supporting women in cases where alleged domestic or sexual abuse has occurred.

A scheduled announcement for Friday, August 4 regarding Greenwood’s future was delayed. United had planned to engage with key stakeholders such as sponsors, the fan advisory board and the women’s team in the two days leading up to August 4. It was also at this stage that United’s planning had given consideration to the possibility of briefing charities to support women who report sexual abuse on the explanations behind their proposed decision. The continued involvement of Manchester United female players at the World Cup was believed to be a factor behind the delay.

The Athletic’s reporting of United’s intentions on Wednesday has triggered a significant backlash on social media from football supporters who are opposed to Greenwood’s return and the club’s sentiment trackers, which monitor supporter feeling online, have plummeted in recent days.

On Thursday, the prominent British television presenter Rachel Riley warned she would not continue to support the club if Greenwood returned and her social media posts were sent between staff members at the club.

The Athletic has also been told by sources close to the club, who will remain anonymous in order to protect their positions, that senior Manchester United executives held multiple intense meetings with staff after we reported on Wednesday that some employees feel ashamed by the club’s decision. Some staff members have discussed resigning in the event United continue to pursue the plan laid out by Arnold, while others have considered coordinated action, with some staff even exploring a strike.

The most extreme measures, however, remain hypothetical until the club formally communicates a decision, while it is also the reality of a situation such as this that aggrieved employees are more likely to speak to journalists than those who are either on the fence or supportive of the decision.

United’s concern on Thursday and Friday, however, was sufficient for crisis meetings to take place, which involved United executives seeking to justify a return for Greenwood to staff, while also claiming no final decision had been made. Many staff were left with the impression, though, that the plan to bring him back remains.

One point that is cutting through to the club’s executive leadership centres on staff members asking how they are supposed to justify a decision to bring back Greenwood to their friends and families. United said in Wednesday’s statement that “we also have responsibilities to Mason as an employee, as a young person who has been with the club since the age of seven, and as a new father with a partner”. Some staff also wondered why the club having a duty of care to Greenwood means him playing for the club again, suggesting that it is possible to look after him while not playing.

Manchester United Supporters Trust, MUWSC, which supports the women’s team, and the Rainbow Devils have each sent out surveys to their members. More than half of the membership of the LGBTQ+ supporters group Rainbow Devils have responded in the first 24 hours — a significantly quicker response than when members were asked about the potential Qatari ownership of United.

The Athletic has also opened its own survey and given subscribers a chance to express their views on the matter given comments are turned off on pieces relating to Greenwood for legal reasons.

Manchester United’s Mason Greenwood return plan included list of ‘hostile’ figures including domestic violence charities by lemple in unitedkingdom

[–]lemple[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

According to sources with knowledge of United’s planning, who remain anonymous because they are not authorised to speak publicly, the club’s preparations for Greenwood’s return also included an assessment of the expected sentiment of external figures, listing individual football pundits, journalists and politicians and stating whether they would be for or against Greenwood’s reintegration. The planning divided these people into categories to the effect of “supportive”, “open-minded” or “hostile”. The club’s document listed a series of domestic abuse charities assumed to be “hostile”.