ALL things Rooney PLEASE! [Merged]

[db79ctid]

Re: Rooney and the legal implications

I think it would be called a right to reply. Fergie was the first one to put his side of the story across, rooney then replied with his version of events. If anything I think it is Rooney who has more right to be pissed the way fergie questioned his respect for the club. What grounds would you ever imagine the club could sue Rooney for? For not agreeing to sign a new contract? Bosman sorted that out. For making it public knowledge about the contract dispute? Fergie was the one who confirmed it and made it official. I expect united to give it one more charm offensive in the next few weeks to try and get a contract signed after that they will try and destroy him, infact I wouldn't be surprised if the recent hooker story was maybe let slip or maybe just encouraged by the club after he turned down the contract the first time in august

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Re: Rooney and the legal implications

he has to play, otherwise his value drops, United have to get him into form to put his value up, Fergie doesn't really have a choice, it's beautiful.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

Re: Rooney and the legal implications

There may be a disciplinary issue, but there is no contract breach (barring incredible foresight)

 

[mike1923]

Re: Rooney and the legal implications

I agree he's made his position untenable, but at the end of the day, it was United who made it public.

Rooney told United IN PRIVATE that he didn't want to extend his contract. Ferguson made this public in his press conference (although the rumours were flying and he didn;t have much choice) and then Rooney made a statement in reply.

If they tried to sue him, he would just say that he told them privately he wasn't going to extend his contract, but that he's perfectly willing to play in the meantime. He's never even said he wants to leave now. He just doesn't want to extend his contract (which he doesn't have to) and for that reason United will look to sell him now before his value drops. Rooney's not made his position untenable. If the rumours hadn't come out and Fergie hadn't give his press conference nobody would even know he didn't want to renew his deal.

 

[daveduke67]

Re: Rooney and the legal implications

he has to play, otherwise his value drops, United have to get him into form to put his value up, Fergie doesn't really have a choice, it's beautiful.

It would appear they are in a lose-lose situation - lose face if they play him - lose out if they dont - awwwwwww poor rags :-(

United? I think that is the last thing they at the moment.

 

[kippaxblue76]

Re: All things Rooney! [Merged]

Rooney is at Carrington.

 

[Barcon]

Re: Rooney and the legal implications

I thought that bacon face was the one that first officially said that Rooney wouldn't sign a contract. If that is the case, it is the rags that have basically made him inelligeble. They can't sue him, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them accuse somebody of tapping him up.

 

[chedleeblue]

Re: All things Rooney! [Merged]

Rooney is at Carrington.

lol which side...

 

[Rushton121]

Re: Rooney and the legal implications

Rooney can't be sued for his statement. All he's said Is that he had meetings with United and wasn't given the assurances he was looking for. He's not doing a Robinho and using every chance he gets to say how much he wants to leave. Plue it was Ferguson who brought it to the publics attention.

 

[Gordyola]

Re: Rooney and the legal implications

i think united will suspend him without pay today for bringing the club into disrepute,he will have no further contact with the players and possibly be allowed to train with another club untill he is sold in the window.

Max fine is two weeks wages PFA rules