Tim-Sanchez 11mo ago • 100%
No they don't? You can suspend players after an accusation, like United did with Greenwood. Especially if 5 people are making an accusation with the police investigating.
A contract doesn't mean teams are forced to pay players.
Tim-Sanchez 11mo ago • 100%
We barely have owners, so that's definitely what they've done
Tim-Sanchez 11mo ago • 100%
Crazy that it hasn't happened in so long, especially with what you can lipread and know is being said. If referees were much stricter on dissent at the top level it would have a huge benefit at all levels of the game. It would be tough for a few weeks with probably a lot of red cards, but teams and players would soon adapt.
Tim-Sanchez 11mo ago • 100%
There was no jeopardy involved, he already had generational wealth and still would have earned millions in England.
Tim-Sanchez 12mo ago • 100%
That was a recommendation to IFAB, not the rule
Tim-Sanchez 12mo ago • 100%
Players are much more likely to pull out of any other tournaments to preserve their fitness for the World Cup. As we saw with Qatar, it's all talk and players won't quit on the World Cup.
Tim-Sanchez 12mo ago • 100%
I think you've misunderstood, they didn't intend offence and therefore it's not offensive
Tim-Sanchez 1y ago • 100%
This is the original article, it includes non-salary pay. This is the original source, so it seems believable.