Is it? Every man and dog sits alongside Ole during games but not Butt. We replaced him as head of the academy with someone with actual experience in the job while we gave butt a job with pretty much the same title of that of Murtough with the difference that the latter have the head of the academy reporting to him rather then to Nicky. But hey head of first team development is serious business at a club which already have a manager, an assistant manager, a horde of first team coaches + a head of football development & a head of academy. None of these people seem to reports to Nicky butt
Nicky Butt arrested | Feb 2020: Assault charge dropped
- Thread starter Tarrou
- Start date
Its the truth. Siege mentality, competitive/bad losers syndrome and all that. Tbf
Intelligent people tend to question orders, put their well being first etc. At a club where we weren't top dogs salary wise for 90% of our history that translate into bad news. You want players to be zealots to the cause and give their 101% despite probably being better off elsewhere. There is nowhere better then United because its Manchester United period. No wonder why our most loyal players aren't exactly geniuses tactically wise.
The skillet needed to be a top player is very different to that of a top manager/tactician. It's similar to war. The foot soldier requires different a skillset to that of a general
Last edited:
I've not read the stories or any official documents, if there are any. But for her to be pressing charges it's hard to evaluate the severity, that's a pretty serious step in itself. Could be the last drop, could be a one time thing, who knows.
I also think it's a bit alarming to be grading domestic violence on a scale of "OK" "Not OK". It's all not OK.
Sorry but why would Nicky Butt be sat alongside Ole and his coaches whatever job title he has, Nick Cox doesn't, nor do Neil Wood or Quinton Fortune.
Nick Cox is in his 3rd year at United, it's not as though he's just been brought in because he's better qualified, and Nicky as I said previously was reluctant to take the Head of Academy role because he wanted to focus on coaching, and not be stuck behind a desk snowed under with paperwork - the job he's got now is idea, if you're a young kid at Old Trafford on the verge of the first-team who better than somebody who knows first-hand the sacrifices you have to make it United, and he can focus 100% on what the individual needs which is something the players don't get in the 23s or when they move up to the first-team squad when they are short of numbers - and Nicky being the lad he is will take it personally if any of the lads sent to him to be 'polished' don't make it. Great move by the club.
Nick Cox has 4 years experience as Watford's academy manager, he then served as head of the academy at the same club for 2 years and then he moved to Sheffield United were he was head of the academy there for another 3 years and a half. At United he was academy manager for 3 years and 6 months until they gave him the job of head of the academy. This guy is fully qualified with a BSC in coach science, a PCET and an MSD in Sporting directorship Sports leadership. Nicky Butt on the other hand has been head of the academy from February 2016 so yes he's far less experienced and qualified then Cox is in the job.
Butt's job is to "continue the strong bond between the Academy and the first team, to create a seamless journey for young players stepping up to the next level. He will continue to be a key contributor on all major Academy decisions and will be part of the Technical Board on wider football leadership" whatever that means. He doesn't sit alongside Ole during games while we already have a head of football development in Mourtough. Also if I'm a kid on the verge of the first team then I would be more inspired having someone beside me who I made it as a regular first teamer rather then having spent his career acting as Roy Keane's cover and then move to Newcastle were he kind of sucked. It would help remembering him playing as well. Butt left United in 2004. Those who were born on that date are now 15. Considering that most people start understanding football at age 7-11 then most of the kids at the United academy don't even remember Nicky play.
I believe Michael Carrick is far more relevant since he's younger (ie he's been in that situation earlier then Butt was), he was far more talented, his style of football is suited more to the modern game (lets face it the lots of running & heart and little talent to match role is dying out at top level) and guess what, he actually made it as a regular first teamer with Manchester United.
Let’s be fair though, the only one who did something truly awful was Giggs. The others are all okay blokes with some flaws like the rest of us.
They probably struggled over a phone.
I'm not sure what country you're from, but in England Assault can be literally pushing somebody away/over.
What i'm getting at is there's a big difference between snatching + throwing a phone away in an aggressive manner, and physically beating somebody up. People are seeing the headlines and automatically assuming the latter. For all we know his ex wife could be trying to get back at him and making it all up to drag his name through the mud, we just genuinely don't know.
Brophs
Spirit of 92, working towards bringing building a new culture back to the club!
Right. But if he's found guilty (even "just" of assaulting his wife by hurting her hand and smashing her phone) he should rightly be in trouble with the club. There might indeed be a big difference between that and beating your wife up but neither is acceptable, which is why he's facing charges.
I'm sure the club will take action if necessary, but until that happens we must not act like he is guilty of something much worse. We don't know what really happened or the situation surrounding it.
IMO from the charge I don't see how he could be found guilty personally. It'll be his word against hers and any good lawyer will get that thrown out.
Unless he has previous of course.
Did he hit her or was it just a shove?
Why would his employer be allowed to discipline him over an issue that didn’t happen where he’s employed and with someone who is not employed by his employer?
It’s pretty illogical that people think it’s ok to sack someone for things that aren’t employment related. Drunk drivers are cnuts, but people don’t expect players to be sacked for doing so.
It's fairly standard for a football club as they need to protect themselves from the sort of reputational damage that comes from having someone who assaults their wife associated with the club. In fact I would imagine there are conduct stipulations in their contracts.
A coach in Italy was recently sacked for a Facebook post he made about Greta Thunberg, for example, which also wasn't related to his job.
It depends on the nature of the offence and the nature of the person's job.
Didn't he reportedly have an affair with the nanny?
Multiple reports of infidelity with different women over the last 15 years.
So that makes the entire US army and British army a bunch of morons, as any luck with those WMD'S in Iraq yet ?
Ok so either email or read Bryan Robson book on why he joined utd when Liverpool matched our Transfer fee. Also we have been "top dogs salary wise" for the past decade and look how great we are.
I dont know what you're current job is, but you should write to prez of France, as he would love you as his official mouthpiece in his sad efforts in creating a super duper European army given you're choice of words in this and you're OP.
Exactly some people have it written into their employment contract that they cannot conduct behaviour which would bring negative press onto the organization for which they are employed. Probably the case at Utd if they are smart.
I bet he did, but I also bet Victoria hasn't been faithful either. I genuinely believe that for most celebrity power couples like that, it sort of comes with the territory for both parties involved. You just know your significant other is going to be rubbing shoulders with other rich, powerful people of status and that 'shit will happen' but it's a mutually beneficial situation so 'don't ask don't tell' becomes a sort of mantra. Just how I see it.
Look how often Rooney has publicly shamed Coleen. She barely batted an eyelid and is now a powerful successful woman in her own right but this came about because she was 'Wayne Rooney's wife/missus'. Take the rough with the smooth and all that.
Well done Sir
Of course, and there are numerous other scenarios in which committing a criminal offence (outside the workplace) would result in immediate dismissal from your job.
An expert in employment law would have a field day. Plus whatever happened with Butt was not put on social media, it was a private interaction.
And has already been stated we have a ‘wife beater’ statue outside the stadium. whatever happened has zero to do with his job. Nor does it reflect on the club. Much like we didn’t sack Rooney for drink driving and shagging about. Plus numerous other difficulties players have gotten into.
If Butt is found guilty it reflects on him as a person. I’d very much doubt anything will be proven in court as it’s his word against hers and only 2 people will know whatever actually happened.
I can't believe how many people aren't remotely interested in the facts, just sack him & be done with it. Kangaroo trial & execution is it?
Let's wait to see what the facts are first, people make mistakes sometimes. It doesn't immediately make him a vicious wife beater.
I hope none of you people advocating sacking him never, ever, do anything wrong in your life ever.
Let's wait to see what the facts are first, people make mistakes sometimes. It doesn't immediately make him a vicious wife beater.
I hope none of you people advocating sacking him never, ever, do anything wrong in your life ever.
There seems like a mad rush to judge him for this before it’s even been proved he’s committed a crime. Let’s see if he’s found guilty before we start talking about sacking him.
The charge he’s facing is actually one that Paul Gascoigne was cleared of the other day, so clearly it’s quite a wide-ranging charge, and possibly not as clear cut as it sounds.
The charge he’s facing is actually one that Paul Gascoigne was cleared of the other day, so clearly it’s quite a wide-ranging charge, and possibly not as clear cut as it sounds.
People got their pitchforks up and wants a riot.
Rabble Rabble
Rabble Rabble
More like trial by social media. Facts mean nothing nowadays. Just gossip and innuendo.
Brillant
Big fan of Alan Partridge had no idea these existed. Are they new?Brillant
Yeah, like I said, I don't know what happened, what the context is and the history. So impossible to say anything definitive. Best case scenario for him is he wrestled for the phone and broke it. Nothing more, before or since, and she holds a grudge for whatever that is not violence.
No, that's from the old series, a good few years back. As relevant and funny as the day they were made
Manager of wales and manager of a women’s football team above ‘Head of something’ at Manchester United?:...
give your head a wobble.
The former does seem to be real jobs
Any incident of domestic violence is abhorrent but please let's remember that the British justice system for its flaws rightly has the reputation as being the fairest in the world because of the 'innocent until proven guilty' and 'reasonable doubt' factors.
While I think it's highly commendable that western societies' attitudes to domestic violence have changed for the better, we cannot ignore the human factor. Women are just like men in that there are those who will lie or in certain cases physically attack their partner although it is far more likely to be the other way around. I have no idea what happened between Nicky and Shelley but I don't want to judge him or anybody male or female before due processes have taken place to establish that.
While I think it's highly commendable that western societies' attitudes to domestic violence have changed for the better, we cannot ignore the human factor. Women are just like men in that there are those who will lie or in certain cases physically attack their partner although it is far more likely to be the other way around. I have no idea what happened between Nicky and Shelley but I don't want to judge him or anybody male or female before due processes have taken place to establish that.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Very interesting in the current climate, especially with the Caroline Flack case
Guessing difference is there was enough evidence without Flack's boyfriend testifying to pursue the case, while the case with Butt hinged on Barlow's testimony.
I agree with that. I know that there are probably significant differences but it Just throws up the continuing debate that " if it had been a man, they would have thrown the book at him."
It appears that argument is pure fallacy
Best to judge it on its own faults and merits. There will be so many possible reasons for this outcome. She may have been terrified. She may have been a terrible witness. And on. And on.
Drawing parallels to a completely different case feels a bit wrong.