When a football player widely considered to be among the greatest of all time effectively declared war on one of the world’s biggest clubs, the fallout was always going to be colossal.
Over the course of a lengthy interview, Cristiano Ronaldo took aim at Manchester United, the team’s manager, its owners and a succession of former players who he believes have wronged him.
Although the contents of his discussion with Piers Morgan on TalkTV has been the source of countless headlines as it aired over two parts, some of his comments will be of far greater consequence than others.
The Portuguese superstar earns a salary reported to be between £400,000 and £500,000 a week as part of a contract that runs until the end of the season.
At 37 years old, he has been repeatedly excluded from United’s first XI this season under new manager Erik ten Hag – and forced for the first time since he was a teenager to confront the fact he is not an automatic starter for his club.
And whether his second stint at United – which he left for Real Madrid in 2009 – ends as initially intended in May now appears in considerable doubt.
What did Ronaldo say that will be the biggest source of concern to Manchester United?
Probably the most significant sections of the interview centred around Ronaldo’s comments about the club itself, its owners and the manager:
• He accused the club of “betraying” him and claimed he had not been able to help them as he had hoped because it was “hard when they cut your legs”
Advertisement
• The club had made “zero progress” since the retirement of former manager Sir Alex Ferguson, he claimed, while criticising its facilities and adding “the infrastructure is not good”
• Ronaldo criticised Ten Hag, saying “I don’t have respect” for the Dutchman and claiming he had refused to come on as a substitute in a game because he felt “provoked” by the coach
• He alleged that two senior figures at the club doubted his daughter was sick, as he had told them when he missed pre-season training
•The player said the club’s owners, the Glazers, “don’t care about the club, professional sport”
Image: Ronaldo said he did not ‘respect’ manager Erik ten Hag
What have United said so far?
Manchester United have said very little to date following the airing of the interview.
The club released a short statement on Friday, saying: “Manchester United has this morning initiated appropriate steps in response to Cristiano Ronaldo’s recent media interview.
“We will not be making further comment until this process reaches its conclusion.”
Image: The Portuguese has repeatedly been a substitute this season after being passed up for selection in the starting line-up. Pic: AP
What legal options do United have – and can they terminate his contract?
There is at least one aspect of the story around which there is seemingly consensus among sports law experts, and that concerns whether Ronaldo’s actions – or words – will amount to a breach of contract.
Udo Onwere is a renowned sports lawyer – himself an ex-professional footballer – who heads the sports practice at law firm Bray & Krais – and represents clients including former United star Rio Ferdinand and current England player Reece James.
“The basic Premier League employment contract means every player is under an obligation that means they’re not allowed to say anything that brings the club into disrepute,” he told Sky News.
“Without a doubt, what he said in the Piers Morgan interview will be an immediate breach. I don’t think there’s really any debate around that, just because of the words he’s used.
“If a player is talking about being betrayed by the club and the club not honouring its commitments to him, then it’s not going to be possible to argue that’s not bringing the club into disrepute.
“The question is whether the club will regard that as being gross misconduct and seek to terminate his contract immediately, or in January when he gets back from the World Cup.
“Alternatively, they may decide to go down the route of launching disciplinary action, and maybe seeking to potentially fine him.”
Jamie Singer, a partner at sports law specialists Onside Law, told Sky News the debate within the sports law industry had largely focused on whether Ronaldo was guilty of gross misconduct.
“When you’re using language like ‘betrayal’ in respect of the club, it’s not going to be hard to demonstrate there’s been a breach of contract,” he said.
“The question is whether it’s so significant a breach that it constitutes gross misconduct.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:19
Ronaldo seems surprised by brief handshake
Has anything like this happened before?
There are only a handful of cases of relevance in English football.
One high-profile precedent involved Chelsea and former Manchester United striker Romelu Lukaku.
He gave an interview in January, in which he appeared to criticise then-manager Thomas Tuchel – saying he was “not happy” and complaining about the tactics at Chelsea.
In that case, however, Lukaku apologised to the club and was subject to disciplinary action before being loaned to Inter Milan.
“I don’t think anything like that will happen here, given the language that Cristiano used,” Mr Onwere said.
Image: Romelu Lukaku during his time at Chelsea. Pic: AP
The other key contrast with that case is the fact that Lukaku had only recently been bought for £90m and remained a saleable asset to the club.
“If this was a young Cristiano Ronaldo, and he was worth say £100m or more, they’d probably take a different course of action,” Mr Onwere said.
“But because he is at an age where they couldn’t expect a big transfer fee, and he’s earning £400,000 or £500,000 a week, then they’re more likely to take the view that this has become too much of an expensive headache, and they just need to get rid.”
Mr Singer said the particulars of the case made it a highly unusual one, which would likely have a crucial bearing on the outcome.
“It’s a really intriguing one, because normally clubs steer clear of aiming for termination [of contract] because the value of the player’s registration is so important,” he said.
“But here you could have a situation where both parties would not be unhappy about a termination, and it appears that perhaps Ronaldo may be engineering that.
“From Ten Hag’s perspective, it’s clearly been a thorn in his side… so here we have a 37-year-old who we’re not going to get a big transfer fee for, but who we’re spending an absolute fortune on each week.
“If you compare it to the Lukaku situation, his registration was certainly seen as an asset which you did not want to jeopardise by terminating.
“Ronaldo, however, may actually be seen as a liability rather than an asset.”
Mr Onwere said he had represented one of the few prominent professional footballers to have previously had his contract terminated.
In that instance, the Hull City gave notice they would be terminating Jimmy Bullard’s contract in 2011 following an incident on a pre-season trip to Slovenia – but Mr Onwere said a settlement was eventually agreed after the player appealed.
“This is obviously a very different situation, because here you’re talking about one of the greatest players of all time, someone earning a huge amount of money, but who is 37 years old.”
Image: Sports lawyer Udo Onwere said the World Cup, where Ronaldo will represent Portugal, will be a welcome distraction for United. Pic: AP
What course of action are United most likely to take with Ronaldo?
Mr Onwere: “The disciplinary process option might be preferred as they could then manage it within the club, in private, and it would mean they don’t have to air their dirty laundry in public.
“But my gut instinct is that United will want to be seen to deal with this swiftly and very decisively, and I suspect they will seek to terminate [Ronaldo’s contract], just because it has become so public, and they will feel they have strong grounds for doing that.
“They will want to show that they cannot be dominated, even by someone on the level of Cristiano Ronaldo.
“It could be difficult, though, because Ronaldo is a wealthy guy and depending on which course of action they take, there could be pushback, and it could become even messier.”
Mr Singer said Ronaldo could decide to challenge whichever course of action United opted for.
“If he does object, he may choose to defend his position in any internal hearing if the club decide to initiate a disciplinary process,” he said.
“But if the club terminates his contract, he could appeal that to the Premier League and say the club were not entitled to do so and have done so.
“That very rarely happens, because it very rarely gets to the situation where clubs terminate a contract in contested fashion. However, here we are talking about a highly unusual set of circumstances.”
Mr Onwere agreed that the situation was an extraordinary one.
“He’s taken a nuclear option, knowing that it’s going to cause a big hoo-ha, and you’ve got to assume that’s what he wanted,” he said.
“The man that he is, the footballer that he is, has to be respected, and when you’re at that level I can see how he might feel completely disrespected by the club.
“Whether he’s gone about it the right way is a different discussion.
“So I think the most likely situation is that they terminate the contract but agree a settlement of some kind.
“One other option is that they could terminate the contract but hold on to his registration, although that could lead to all kinds of other problems – with him likely arguing that this is a restraint of trade – and they will want to make this as clean as they can.
“The club will be pleased that the World Cup is coming up now, as that will be a welcome distraction that will allow them to get on with things in the background.”
A criminal investigation has been launched into the Glastonbury performances of Kneecap and Bob Vylan.
Police announced the decision on Monday afternoon after reviewing video footage and audio of both sets, which took place on Saturday.
It comes after the BBC said it regretted the decision not to pull the live stream for Bob Vylan’s Glastonbury performance, during which frontman Bobby Vylan shouted anti-IDF (Israel Defence Forces) chants.
Later on Monday, as the story had made headlines throughout the day, drummer Bobbie Vylan released a video statement on Instagram, saying politicians who have spent time criticising the band should be “utterly ashamed” for giving “room” to this over other issues.
He also addressed what was said on stage, saying: “Regardless of how it was said, calling for an end to the slaughter of innocents is never wrong. To civilians of Israel, understand this anger is not directed at you, and don’t let your government persuade you that a call against an army is a call against the people.”
Image: Moglai Bap and Mo Chara of Kneecap perform at Glastonbury. Pic: Reuters
In a statement, Avon and Somerset Police said that after reviewing footage of both performances, further enquiries are required and a criminal investigation is now being undertaken.
“A senior detective has been appointed to lead this investigation,” a spokesperson said. “This has been recorded as a public order incident at this time while our enquiries are at an early stage.”
The force said the investigation will be “evidence-led and will closely consider all appropriate legislation, including relating to hate crimes”.
“We have received a large amount of contact in relation to these events from people across the world and recognise the strength of public feeling,” it added. “There is absolutely no place in society for hate.”
What happened?
Image: Bob Vylan performing on the West Holts Stage, during the Glastonbury Festival at Worthy Farm in Somerset. Yui Mok/PA Wire
During Bob Vylan’s set, the duo performed in front of a screen that showed several messages, including one that said Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to “genocide”.
Bobby Vylan also led chants of “death to the IDF”.
The set was live streamed by the BBC as part of its Glastonbury coverage, but has not been made available on demand.
Politicians including the prime minister have criticised the performance. Glastonbury organiser Emily Eavis said the chants “crossed a line” and that there was no place at the festival for “antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence”.
A BBC spokesperson said the broadcaster respected freedom of expression “but stands firmly against incitement to violence”.
They added: “The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves…
“The team were dealing with a live situation, but with hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance. We regret this did not happen.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:32
What’s the Glastonbury controversy?
Media watchdog Ofcom said it was in talks with the BBC and that the broadcaster “clearly has questions to answer” over the stream.
Irish-language rap trio Kneecap were on stage afterwards. Before their appearance at the festival, there had been calls for Glastonbury to remove them from the bill – as rapper Liam Og O hAnnaidh (who performs as Mo Chara) is facing a terror charge, accused of displaying a flag in support of the proscribed group Hezbollah at a gig in London last November.
Glastonbury organisers kept them on the line-up, but the BBC chose not to stream their set live. An edited version was later made available on demand.
On stage, the band led chants of “f*** Keir Starmer”.
O hAnnaidh’s bandmate Naoise O Caireallain (Moglai Bap) said they would “start a riot outside the courts” for O hAnnaidh’s next appearance, before clarifying: “No riots, just love and support, and support for Palestine.”
Hundreds of people turned out in protest for his first court appearance earlier this month.
After the police investigation was announced, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy criticised the “appalling and unacceptable” scenes at Glastonbury and said the government would not tolerate antisemitism.
She said she had called BBC director-general Tim Davie after the broadcast of Bob Vylan’s set to find out why it had aired, and why the feed had not been cut.
“I expect answers to these questions without delay,” she said.
Ms Nandy said she had spoken to members of the Jewish community, including attendees at Glastonbury, who said they were concerned by imagery and slogans and ended up creating their own “safe space”.
Christopher Landau, the US deputy secretary of state, said the band had been banned from the US ahead of a tour later this year due to their “hateful tirade” at the festival.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
Bob Vylan were set to perform in Chicago, Brooklyn and Philadelphia in the autumn. They are due to perform at Radar Festival in Manchester on Saturday and Boardmasters, a surfing and music festival in Newquay, Cornwall, in August.
Sharing a statement on Instagram after the Glastonbury set, Bobby Vylan said: “Teaching our children to speak up for the change they want and need is the only way that we make this world a better place.
“As we grow older and our fire starts to possibly dim under the suffocation of adult life and all its responsibilities, it is incredibly important that we encourage and inspire future generations to pick up the torch that was passed to us.”
The war in Gaza, which has continued for more than 18 months, began after Hamas militants launched attacks in Israel on 7 October 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking roughly 250 hostages.
More than 860 Israeli soldiers have been killed since the war began, more than 400 of them during the fighting in Gaza.
Israel’s offensive in Gaza has devastated the enclave and killed around 56,500 people, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilians and combatants, but says more than half of the dead are women and children.
A 92-year-old man has been found guilty of raping and murdering a woman born 133 years ago – in what’s thought to be the UK’s longest cold case to reach trial.
Ryland Headley was convicted at Bristol Crown Court of killing 75-year-old mother of two, Louisa Dunne, at her home back in June 1967.
Latest DNA technology – as well as matching palm prints taken at the scene more than 57 years ago – led a jury to find Headley guilty on both charges.
Image: Ryland Headley, now aged 92, has been found guilty of rape and murder. Pic Avon and Somerset Police
Image: The front of Louisa Dunne’s home. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Detective Inspector Dave Marchant from Avon and Somerset Police said forces across the country are investigating whether Headley could be linked to other unsolved crimes.
“This investigation was a blend of new and old forensic techniques – DNA being the latest and greatest…but we were able to utilise that original investigative material,” he said.
On the morning of 28 June 1967, neighbours noticed that Louisa Dunne, born in 1892, wasn’t standing on her doorstep as usual.
They found her lying dead inside her home in the Easton area of Bristol – bruised, blood coming from one ear, vomit in her mouth and her underwear around her ankles.
More on Crime
Related Topics:
The police investigation at the time found traces of semen on intimate swabs and on the skirt she was wearing, but it was around 20 years before DNA testing.
Image: Louisa Dunne’s skirt. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Image: Map showing original house-to-house coverage. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
A palm print was also found on one of the rear windows inside the house.
“The original investigation was, by all accounts, massive,” DI Marchant told Sky News.
“Over 19,000 palm print eliminations were taken from men and boys in the Bristol area and beyond. Over 8,000 house-to-house records were completed and several thousand statements were taken,” he added.
But Headley – in his 30s at the time – lived just outside the ring of houses where palm prints were taken.
A post-mortem examination found she had “extensive abrasions” on her face and that the most likely explanation was that a hand had been pressed against her mouth.
Image: The back of Louisa Dunne’s house. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Image: Palmprint images. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Around 20 crates of evidence were stored in Avon and Somerset Police HQ for nearly six decades alongside other cold cases.
The case was reviewed in 2024, with new DNA testing on the sperm found on the skirt Ms Dunne had been wearing.
Investigating officers were told the results showed a DNA match on the national database that was “a billion times” more likely to belong to Headley than anyone else.
“I had to read that email several times to fully digest the content of it and believe what I was reading. Then it was, okay, game on, let’s get this investigation going,” said DI Marchant.
Headley was arrested at his home in Ipswich in November 2024 – he did not give evidence during the trial.
Image: Headley during his arrest. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
Image: Louisa Dunne in 1933. Pic: Avon and Somerset Constabulary
The jury heard that forensic experts had matched Headley’s palm print, taken on arrest, to that of the one found on Ms Dunne’s window at the time.
The judge allowed the prosecution to raise the fact that Headley had already spent time in jail for committing two other rapes, around a decade after Ms Dunne’s murder.
Both those cases involved attacks against elderly women in similar circumstances.
Prosecutor Anna Vigars KC told the jury these offences demonstrate to all of us that Headley “has a tendency” to act in exactly the same way that we say that he did back in 1967.
“In other words, to break into people’s homes at night and, in some cases, to target an elderly woman living alone, to have sex with her despite her attempts to fend him off, and to threaten violence,” she said.
Image: Ryland Headley is on trial for the 1967 rape and murder of 75-year-old Louisa Dunne. Pic: PA
Speaking before the verdict, Louisa Dunne’s granddaughter recalled the moment police told her of progress in the cold case, nearly six decades on: “She said, ‘this is about your grandmother’, and I said, ‘have they caught him?’ It came out, I never thought I’d say anything like that. Have you caught him? and she said, ‘we have a suspect’.”
She described the impact of the attack on her grandmother and that a conviction would bring relief:
“I accepted it. I accepted that some murders just never get solved. And some people just have to live with that emptiness and that sadness.
“I think it’s appalling, absolutely appalling. The poor woman – it must have been absolutely terrifying. And the reality of a rape, I don’t like thinking about, I don’t think anybody does,” she added.
The Crown Prosecution Service told Sky News that it was not aware of a cold case with a longer period between the offence and trial.
DI Marchant told Sky News it demonstrates the value of reviewing such cases: “I think this investigation shows you should never give up.
“You should never look at an investigation and say, ‘oh, it’s too old, it happened X number of years ago’ and have an arbitrary cut off point. At the time we re-instigated it in 2024… there was a chance a suspect could still be alive and as it turned out – he was.”
The BBC has said it regrets not pulling the live stream of Bob Vylan’s “unacceptable” Glastonbury set – as Ofcom said the broadcaster has “questions to answer”.
The corporation has faced mounting criticism over airing the performance on Glastonbury‘s West Holts Stage, during which the rap-punk duo’s frontman Bobby Vylan led chants of: “Free, free Palestine” and: “Death, death to the IDF (Israel Defence Forces)”.
Sir Keir Starmer condemned the remarks as “appalling hate speech”, while festival organiser Emily Eavis said they “crossed a line” – and media watchdog Ofcom has now also released a statement raising concerns.
This morning, a spokesperson for the prime minister did not directly answer when asked if he still had confidence in BBC director-general Tim Davie.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:32
What is the Glastonbury controversy?
Footage from Bob Vylan’s set on Saturday showed some of the crowd joining in, as the group performed in front of a screen that said Israel’s actions in Gaza amount to “genocide”.
Afterwards, the BBC said there had been a warning on screen about potential “strong and discriminatory language”, but described the comments as “deeply offensive”.
On Monday, a spokesperson released an updated statement, saying the comments were antisemitic and the performance should have been taken off air.
“The BBC respects freedom of expression but stands firmly against incitement to violence,” the statement said. “The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves. We welcome Glastonbury’s condemnation of the performance.”
Image: Pic: PA
A judgement to issue a warning on screen while streaming online was in line with editorial guidelines, the spokesperson added, and the performance has not been made available to view on demand.
“The team were dealing with a live situation but with hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance. We regret this did not happen.
“In light of this weekend, we will look at our guidance around live events so we can be sure teams are clear on when it is acceptable to keep output on air.”
An Ofcom spokesperson said: “We are very concerned about the live stream of this performance, and the BBC clearly has questions to answer.
“We have been speaking to the BBC over the weekend and we are obtaining further information as a matter of urgency, including what procedures were in place to ensure compliance with its own editorial guidelines.”
In a statement shared on Instagram on Sunday, Bobby Vylan said: “Teaching our children to speak up for the change they want and need is the only way that we make this world a better place.
“As we grow older and our fire starts to possibly dim under the suffocation of adult life and all its responsibilities, it is incredibly important that we encourage and inspire future generations to pick up the torch that was passed to us.”
The latest developments follows severe condemnation from the prime minister, who said there was “no excuse for this kind of appalling hate speech”.
Image: Mo Chara of Kneecap at Glastonbury. Pic: Reuters
Sir Keir also referenced a previous statement that Belfast rap group Kneecap, who were on stage after Bob Vylan, should have been removed from the line-up after one member was charged with a terrorism offence.
“I said that Kneecap should not be given a platform and that goes for any other performers making threats or inciting violence,” he said.
Ms Eavis, whose father Michael co-founded the festival, said in a statement that Bob Vylan had “very much crossed a line”.
She added: “Their chants very much crossed a line and we are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence.”
The Israeli embassy posted on X in the hours after the set, saying it was “deeply disturbed by the inflammatory and hateful rhetoric”.
It said the slogan used “advocates for the dismantling of the State of Israel”.
In a separate post on X on Sunday, Israel’s foreign ministry published graphic footage following the attack by Hamas on the Nova festival in Israel on 7 October 2023, and the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) said it would be formally complaining to the BBC over its “outrageous decision” to broadcast the performance.
Speaking to Sky News’ Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillipson behalf of the government, Health Secretary Wes Streeting described the chant as “appalling”, especially at a music festival – “when there were Israelis at a similar music festival who were kidnapped, murdered, raped, and in some cases still held captive”.
He added that while “there’s no justification for inciting violence against Israelis… the way in which Israel’s conducting this war has made it extremely difficult for Israel’s allies around the world to stand by and justify”.
Lucy McMullin, who was in the crowd for Bob Vylan, told Sky News: “When there’s children and civilians being murdered and starved, then I think it’s important that people are speaking out on these issues.
“However, inciting more death and violence is not the way to do it.”
Police have said they are reviewing footage of both the Bob Vylan and Kneecap sets to assess whether any criminal offences were committed.
Speaking to Sky News earlier today, women and equalities minister Baroness Jacqui Smith said the comments “clearly” over-stepped the mark.
“I’m surprised that the BBC carried on broadcasting them live when it was obvious what was happening.”