Manchester United fans' group postpones protest against owners
🗣️Postponement of Protest – Arsenal (H), August 17th
After careful reflection, and in light of the survey results. We have made the decision to postpone the planned protest for the Arsenal home game on Saturday, August 17th.
For us, it has always been, and will always be, about… pic.twitter.com/JXHeO0KfFy
— The 1958 (@The__1958) August 11, 2025
The billionaire British businessman, who owns a 28.94 per cent stake in United, has instigated wide – often unpopular – changes since taking over day-to-day operational control from the Glazers in February 2024.
'Jim Ratcliffe chose to get into bed with the Glazers and, in our opinion, is helping keep them in charge,' said a group representative, who added Ratcliffe was 'no saviour' and 'like a (red) devil in disguise,' last week.
However, after conducting a survey, the group has acknowledged opinion is split and the time is not right for a protest.
A statement read: 'With a fanbase as diverse and passionate as ours, finding the right balance isn't always easy. We've had to consider momentum, timing, fan appetite, broader consequences of protest activity whilst assessing how current and future decisions may impact us as fans.
Manchester United's minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe (Lucy North/PA)
'Given the current sentiment within the fanbase and particularly in light of these recent survey results, it's clear there is no unified view on the direction of the club under Ratcliffe.
'That split is real, and we believe it would be irresponsible to risk creating a situation that could result in any 'red on red' conflict inside or outside the stadium.'
The group say almost 63 per cent of the near 26,000 respondents to their survey said Ratcliffe and his Ineos company should be held to account for their decisions so far by means of a protest. However, 68 per cent also believed they should be given more time.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Metro
23 minutes ago
- Metro
Emma Raducanu was right to get a crying baby kicked out of her match
As a self-confessed tennis avoider – it's sweaty, monotonous, and that grunting is just weird – I admit I've never paid much attention to British star Emma Radacanu. That is, until I saw the footage of her this week, asking for a screaming child to be removed from the court at the Cincinnati Open. She may not have won against rival Aryna Sabalenka, but as far as I'm concerned it was Game, Set and Match to Radacanu, my new sporting heroine. Give her all the silverware. I commend Emma for finding the courage to speak up and complain about the noisy tot – or rather, its entitled parents – who seemingly were perfectly content to allow it to disturb a highly pressurised sports competition, the concentration of the players, and the enjoyment of the crowd who'd paid through the nose to be there. I use the word 'courage' very deliberately because it's actually not easy to do what Emma did, in full glare of TV cameras, and risk the wrath of equally entitled parents who see no issue with allowing little children, through no fault of their own, to wreak havoc on the enjoyment of others. Let me be clear, I do not subscribe to the old adage: 'Children should be seen and not heard'. I have two myself – boys, aged eight and 10 – and I fully support the progress we've made societally in acknowledging children, including them, and making them and their parents feel welcome and comfortable in the world we all share. However, just because you can bring children into certain settings, doesn't mean you should. And it definitely doesn't mean you have carte blanche to let them behave any which way, with no consideration for others. Yet, increasingly, that seems to be the hot take of many modern parents, whose awareness of and respect for others evaporated the moment they left the maternity ward. I've lost count of the moments in my own life spoiled by other people's children. Especially when there is no recognition that they either shouldn't be there in the first place or their behaviour needs to be carefully managed and moderated, out of consideration for others. From meals in posh restaurants that nobody in their right mind would class as kiddy-friendly, to evening theatre performances and sporting fixtures. My own peace and pleasure has been shattered on multiple occasions by babies and children crying, running wild, and generally being a nuisance. When I got married, I banned children from the entire wedding day, simply because I'd been at too many dominated by kids whose parents were having too much fun to actually parent them. There was no way that was happening on my big day. And even when some guests refused to come without their offspring, I held firm on the policy. Of course, any parent can find themselves in a situation where, even in an appropriate setting, the roaring starts or a cranky toddler has a meltdown. But what I, and other considerate mums and dads do, is swiftly exit. Many times I've had to abandon a half-drunk cup of coffee in a cafe or leave a shop prematurely because I simply wouldn't dream of co-opting people around me into my child 'having a moment'. Why didn't the tennis-watching parents of the crying baby stand up the moment they began to squeal, and leave? By the time Emma Radacanu raised it with the umpire, the crying had reportedly been going on for 10 minutes! Since having my sons, I've planned my social life carefully because the reality is, when you have children, there are just some locations and events you should avoid for the sake of others. More Trending Yes, it's frustrating but it's about being a realistic and decent person, and accepting this temporary parenthood penalty until they're a bit older. Now, I'd happily take them to a sporting event (like a tennis match) because I know they have the attention span and maturity to sit through it and behave. But when they were babies? Absolutely not! I've no doubt Emma's ears will be burning from outraged social media comments and chats on mum's forums about her complaint, but this mum applauds her. It's time parents woke up to the fact that the world doesn't revolve around our cherubs and if we want them to be included and respected, we need to show awareness of others. Do you have a story you'd like to share? Get in touch by emailing Share your views in the comments below. MORE: Mum's killer failed an eye test – but kept on driving MORE: Trump should give Putin a gift in Alaska – then an order MORE: My son tried to talk to another child – their reaction stunned me
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Revealed: Man United to open mega pop-up PUB at Old Trafford which can hold over a THOUSAND fans - and it will be open on time for the first game of the season against Arsenal!
Manchester United are to open a 'pop-up pub' at Old Trafford. Officials will unveil vast, 900 square metre-marquee behind the Stretford End in time for their first match of the season on Sunday against Arsenal. The new addition will have room for 1,000 supporters, and be viewed as a form of 'fan village' at Old Trafford. Starting from this weekend's Arsenal season-opener, the new addition will be free to enter and will open three hours before the match starts. The move is aimed at bringing fans to the stadium early and helping to generate and atmosphere in the build up to kick-off. United also believe it will provide an opportunity for local businesses. Manchester-based brewer Shindigger, will provide the beer while food will be supplied by city-centre-based eaterie Yard and Coop. Around 1,000 fans will be able to fit in the gigantic watering hole at Old Trafford from Sunday There will be a fast-pour system via units which can fill a pint in 10 seconds, music from local bands - and for the Arsenal game Denis Irwin will be the first club legend in attendance. Club partners Estée Lauder and Cadbury will provide giveaways, while fans can hang their flags on the marquee wall. The idea came from a consultation with supporters, who said they wanted more to see and do around Old Trafford. Should the pop-up be successful, it could see its stay extended. United are reluctant to spend big on new infrastructure at their current home given they hope to a new stadium in the next five years. However, officials believe the marquee could become popular and satisfy what they see as an immediate need.
The National
39 minutes ago
- The National
Questions on UK spy plane 'over Gaza as Israel killed journalists'
On Sunday, August 10, the Israeli military killed prominent Al Jazeera reporter Anas al-Sharif, as well as four of his colleagues and a freelancer, in a deliberate strike in Gaza City. Israel later claimed that al-Sharif had been a leading member of Hamas – but the allegation was widely contested, with Al Jazeera calling it a 'desperate attempt to silence the voices exposing the impending seizure and occupation of Gaza'. READ MORE: Labour label Palestine Action terrorists – but ignore Nazi salutes from the far-right The Guardian reported that the strike which killed al-Sharif and his colleagues happened at 11.22pm, quoting Palestinian reporter Wadi Abu al-Saud. Flight radar data showed that a spy plane registered under the code N6147U was active at the RAF Akrotiri base, in Cyprus, two hours earlier. There is no flight path available, suggesting the plane's transponder was then turned off. This has been standard practice during spy missions over Palestine. Aid drops have been allowed into Gaza since Israel loosened its blockade of the regionLast week, the Daily Mail reported that plane N6147U belonged to an American private contractor, and had been hired to 'spy on Gaza due to shortage of RAF aircraft'. The UK Government had until then been sending its own aircraft to spy over Gaza since the October 7 attacks on Israel. In April, The Times reported that the UK Government had admitted to holding information gathered from a spy plane over Gaza on the day that an Israeli air strike killed British aid workers. However, the Ministry of Defence refused to release it. After the killing of al-Sharif, the UK's National Union of Journalists asked the Labour Government to back an International Criminal Court (ICC) investigation into Israel's targeting of media workers. In light of the above information, the UK Government was asked: Does the UK Government possess any information gathered by a spy plane over Gaza on August 10/11? Will it release the information publicly? Will it release the information to any investigation (by the ICC or otherwise) into the killing of journalists? SNP MSP Bill Kidd said: 'The SNP is clear that the killing of journalists in Gaza by Israel is indefensible and that Israel should be held to account. 'The UK Government must be fully transparent in answering these questions." A spokesperson for Scotland for Palestine campaign group said: 'Conducting spy flights over Gaza for Israel as it stands accused by the world's highest court of a plausible genocide is already grave. "If further evidence shows that the UK Government was involved in tracking down the last few remaining Palestinian journalists in a targeted assassination by Israel – a crime under international law – then this would be yet another serious mark against the UK Government. 'Similar to past atrocities, anyone who has helped Israel to commit crimes against humanity will one day face the consequences of their actions. READ MORE: Killing of Al Jazeera staff in Gaza 'silencing journalistic voices' 'We thank The National for following up on this and for holding the UK Government to account. 'The UK Government must now comply and release the information that has been requested on its spy flights over Gaza.' The Ministry of Defence declined to comment. Previously, the UK Government has said that its unarmed surveillance flights are conducted for the sole purpose of locating Israeli hostages held in Gaza. It has declined to release any information gathered, citing operational security.
