Manchester United Transfer Rumours/Discussion 2006 :)

CountryWise

I think Hargreaves will leave eventually anyway, the only thing is if United want him sooner rather than later they will have to pay alot of money! Either way though its great to have people talk about competition for midfield places, thats what a top club needs

Draupnir

bucks73 wrote:

Why does he have to represent them off the pitch? If he doesnt want to he doesnt have to. He is picked by McLaren to play football for England not show up at press conferences.

IMO its a ridiculous decision to enforce the ban and if he is not happy with the FA he has every right to tell them to get stuffed with anything they ask him to do that doesnt involve playing football.

How they can ban two United players after doing nothing with two Liverpool players who were also sent off 3 years ago is beyond me. The FA wont get much cooperation on anything from United, Ferguson or Rooney for quite a while I'd say.

Essentially, I think the Liverpool players werent banned because the referee or the Dutch FA didnt report it as they did in the case of United.

jobonar

what did the Liverpool players do to get sent off 3 years ago?

Cutie18Ireland

Bayern have said Hargreaves was left out because he has the flu.

btw, Alan Smith is starting up front with Rossi for the reserves tonight and could then play saturday against Watford.

bucks73

Draupnir wrote:

Essentially, I think the Liverpool players werent banned because the referee or the Dutch FA didnt report it as they did in the case of United.

That just doesnt cut it. The FA could quite easily have ignored the report completely and not suspended either player. What could the referee or Dutch FA do then? Write a strongly worded letter?

What they should have done is use common sense and suspend Scholes but not Rooney for what was a ridiculous red card. But then its very rare to see the FA using common sense.

Unearthly

Yep a case of bottling it. Ref being an absolute **** reporting it, Dutch FA put it on the English FA's table and they didn't have the bottle to overturn it.

Nalz

Cutie18Ireland wrote:

Bayern have said Hargreaves was left out because he has the flu.

they're holding out for more dough IMO

Cutie18Ireland wrote:

btw, Alan Smith is starting up front with Rossi for the reserves tonight and could then play saturday against Watford.

great to see Smithy back. should we spend not too much on Owen Hargreaves (if we get him) I'll b more than happy with our squad.

Sizzler

Either Bayern are playing the media game to the extreme in saying Hargreaves aint going anywhere and he should shut his mouth (Uli Hoeness seems MAJORLY pissed about the whole thing) or they are actually telling the truth and he aint going anywhere ! There was a quote earlier from Hoeness in one of the german papers and he basically said Gill can call him at 830 every morning to talk about the english weather but if he mentions Hargreaves he can fcuk right off lol!

If Fergie was REALLY that interested in getting him before the WC they should have thrown down the 10m and I bet Bayern would have bitten.Cant honestly seeing us getting him now

herbieflowers

Saha apparently "wasn't for sale"...

SteM

bucks73 wrote:

That just doesnt cut it. The FA could quite easily have ignored the report completely and not suspended either player. What could the referee or Dutch FA do then? Write a strongly worded letter?

What they should have done is use common sense and suspend Scholes but not Rooney for what was a ridiculous red card. But then its very rare to see the FA using common sense.

That's exactly right. Even though the incident was reported by the Dutch FA, the English FA could quite easily have reviewed the tape and seen that Rooney's challange shouldn't have been a red card and not imposed a ban. It was within their power to do this but they didn't for some reason. Rooney must feel let down by the FA and I'm not surprised that he'd withdraw his services off the pitch.

Cutie18Ireland

Smith came through 66 minutes of tonights 7-2 win.

Scorers:Chris Eagles, Danny Rose, David Jones, Phil Marsh(2) and Guiseppe Rossi(2)

hawker27

thanks for the update cutie.

Cutie18Ireland wrote:

Smith came through 66 minutes of tonights 7-2 win.

Scorers:Chris Eagles, Danny Rose, David Jones, Phil Marsh(2) and Guiseppe Rossi(2)

Giruilla

Any links to those goals?

jobonar

herbieflowers wrote:

Saha apparently "wasn't for sale"...

every player has their price!!! Shevchenko wasn't for sale either at 1 stage!! Martin Jol caved into Carrick wanting to join utd and its only a matter of time before he gets sick of Hargreaves complaining and realises his heart isnt in the club anymore! and no club wants an unhappy player!

evad_lhorg

Tevez has put in a transfer request at Cointhians.

MonkeyWrench

Ze germans are getting angry with Manu....

Bayern Munich chief executive Karl-Heinz Rummenigge has threatened to report Manchester United to FIFA if they continue their pursuit of Owen Hargreaves.

Hargreaves reportedly had a blow-up with Bayern manager Uli Hoeness on Saturday after declaring he wants to move to United and has been told in no uncertain terms by both Hoeness and coach Felix Magath he must respect his contract.

"It's time to put this matter to bed," said Rummenigge today. "We've told Manchester United that they must end this transfer talk.

"Otherwise, we will turn the matter over to FIFA. Clubs may contact players only if their clubs, with which the player has a contract, agrees to it."

Rummenigge also told TZ: "We are not Hamburg SV, which released (Khalid) Boulahrouz when the first direct offer came in (from Chelsea). We are FC Bayern.

"We give in to no-one. Here the employer decides, not the employee."

evad_lhorg

VEE are ZE BAYERN! VEE BELIEVE IN NOTHING! VEE GIVE IN TO NO ONE!:D

yop

Do ye think that the Hargreaves deal is dead?

Sennas deadline was last Friday though was it not? Prob not make a difference though!

sofireland

Man u are playing hardball now, i'd say the hargreaves deal is on if we can come up with the £'s needed to get bayern to let him go. I'd take Hargreaves over senna!

Tevez, its the mirror stiring things up

Drapper

MonkeyWrench wrote:

Ze germans are getting angry with Manu....

Bayern Munich chief executive Karl-Heinz Rummenigge has threatened to report Manchester United to FIFA if they continue their pursuit of Owen Hargreaves.

Hargreaves reportedly had a blow-up with Bayern manager Uli Hoeness on Saturday after declaring he wants to move to United and has been told in no uncertain terms by both Hoeness and coach Felix Magath he must respect his contract.

"It's time to put this matter to bed," said Rummenigge today. "We've told Manchester United that they must end this transfer talk.

"Otherwise, we will turn the matter over to FIFA. Clubs may contact players only if their clubs, with which the player has a contract, agrees to it."

Rummenigge also told TZ: "We are not Hamburg SV, which released (Khalid) Boulahrouz when the first direct offer came in (from Chelsea). We are FC Bayern.

"We give in to no-one. Here the employer decides, not the employee."

I hope this is all hot air and the deal is reached ASAP!! :(

evad_lhorg

sofireland wrote:

Man u are playing hardball now, i'd say the hargreaves deal is on if we can come up with the £'s needed to get bayern to let him go. I'd take Hargreaves over senna!

Tevez, its the mirror stiring things up

teamtalk.com

gracehopper

The cheek of Rummenigge threatening to report MU. Here's what he sad about the RVN deal:

"Van Nistelrooy has told us he would like to play for us next season, We have already spoken about money with him but it will be United who will finally decide." - The london independant

He has a short memory. The little german sh*t!

I'm still not convinced about Hargreaves' ability tbh. He had a couple of good games for england and now he's worth 17m. B*llicks to that. Richardson had a couple of good games for england, Is he worth 17m?? I'd rather us continue with the team we have than sign Hargreaves for that kind of money.

Unearthly

I can see Hargreaves strolling into OT fasnionably late on August 31. It's the summer of leaving everything till late!

jobonar

Unearthly wrote:

I can see Hargreaves strolling into OT fasnionably late on August 31. It's the summer of leaving everything till late!

when is the deadline for registering players for the CL? if it nots before the 31st then i too can see someone(not neccesarily Hargreaves) arriving then!!

Also i really dont think that utd have the cash available for Tevez. i think he'd be a good signing and all but a midfeilder is still priority!! we need to have players competing for places!

TheMonster

jobonar wrote:

when is the deadline for registering players for the CL? if it nots before the 31st then i too can see someone(not neccesarily Hargreaves) arriving then!!

Also i really dont think that utd have the cash available for Tevez. i think he'd be a good signing and all but a midfeilder is still priority!! we need to have players competing for places!

They have actually not spent any of the transfer money that was available

11M for Ruud 6M for Obi Miki (of the 12M)
14M for Carrick

AthAnRi

Roll on August 31st. So sick of all this specualtion. This summer is proof that the Glazers have no intention of caughing up our hard earned dough for transfers. Utd have only spent a net total of less than £4million. Pathetic. We're no longer about the football we're all about the money and I for one am getting fed up of this Circus. FC United here I come

event

AthAnRi wrote:

Roll on August 31st. So sick of all this specualtion. This summer is proof that the Glazers have no intention of caughing up our hard earned dough for transfers. Utd have only spent a net total of less than £4million. Pathetic. We're no longer about the football we're all about the money and I for one am getting fed up of this Circus. FC United here I come

where is this the glazers fault?

who else has fergie bid for?

do you know that they have turned down request for more cash by him

sprinkles

event wrote:

where is this the glazers fault?

who else has fergie bid for?

do you know that they have turned down request for more cash by him

I agree. I think it's a bit much to be claiming that the Glaziers are holding back on money. We don't know who Fergie wants to bid for and if he has the money to do so. I think that if fergie makes a case for a player who is priced reasonably (unlike Carrick) then I think he'll have the money, but again that's just me speculating, I could be wrong. You've got to assume that the glaziers see this as a business, and the only way they will make money from united is to get them winning on the pitch. If United start to slide the turnover will go down but the repayments on the loan will stay fixed. The glaziers aren't stupid (I hope)

Nalz

Unearthly wrote:

I can see Hargreaves strolling into OT fasnionably late on August 31. It's the summer of leaving everything till late!

hope your right, i think he's a better and hopefully a cheper buy than Carrick.

Fletcher out
Fletcher out
Fletcher out
Fletcher out
Fletcher out
Fletcher out
la la la la la la la!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sizzler

MonkeyWrench wrote:

Ze germans are getting angry with Manu....

Bayern Munich chief executive Karl-Heinz Rummenigge has threatened to report Manchester United to FIFA if they continue their pursuit of Owen Hargreaves.

Hargreaves reportedly had a blow-up with Bayern manager Uli Hoeness on Saturday after declaring he wants to move to United and has been told in no uncertain terms by both Hoeness and coach Felix Magath he must respect his contract.

"It's time to put this matter to bed," said Rummenigge today. "We've told Manchester United that they must end this transfer talk.

"Otherwise, we will turn the matter over to FIFA. Clubs may contact players only if their clubs, with which the player has a contract, agrees to it."

Rummenigge also told TZ: "We are not Hamburg SV, which released (Khalid) Boulahrouz when the first direct offer came in (from Chelsea). We are FC Bayern.

"We give in to no-one. Here the employer decides, not the employee."

I remember posting about this 2 wks ago How the fcuk could Utd make offers to the lad without BM accpting a bid Why has it taken till now for them to react??

AthAnRi

event wrote:

where is this the glazers fault?

who else has fergie bid for?

do you know that they have turned down request for more cash by him

Ferguson has only so much imput into transfer. He resommends players and david gill is the primary negotiator. Ferguson only comes into play when it comes to meeting the individual players. Gill then must negotiate a deal for the player depending on the transfer budget and wage budget allocated to him from the owners of the club.

I am a member of the of the Shareholders UTD(Pheonix from the flames) trust (Not that I really want to be anymore) but the information they send out is usually very accurate. They mentioned in one of their newsletters that the Glazers were struggling to meet payments on there massive debt and that in order to manage it better they were going to have to refinance their morgtage. This was a month before they did it.

They have also stated in the news letters that Ferguson would only be allowed to buy players that they coule either get on a free transfer or players that would have a great chance of making a profit in the future. Where is our 25 million a year budget?

sprinkles

AthAnRi wrote:

Ferguson has only so much imput into transfer. He resommends players and david gill is the primary negotiator. Ferguson only comes into play when it comes to meeting the individual players. Gill then must negotiate a deal for the player depending on the transfer budget and wage budget allocated to him from the owners of the club.

I am a member of the of the Shareholders UTD(Pheonix from the flames) trust (Not that I really want to be anymore) but the information they send out is usually very accurate. They mentioned in one of their newsletters that the Glazers were struggling to meet payments on there massive debt and that in order to manage it better they were going to have to refinance their morgtage. This was a month before they did it.

They have also stated in the news letters that Ferguson would only be allowed to buy players that they coule either get on a free transfer or players that would have a great chance of making a profit in the future. Where is our 25 million a year budget?

No one ever stated that we had a 25mil budget. It was paper gossip, although I do agree that there should be money there but they must have a transfer reserve. 25 mil spent on a young player, like torres etc would reap a return in the long term. He's not going to depreciate over the next 5 - 6 years and you can then sell him and get your money back if you want.

Again though, you can't know what is going on behind the scene. There may be money available or there might not be.

AthAnRi

sprinkles wrote:

No one ever stated that we had a 25mil budget. It was paper gossip, although I do agree that there should be money there but they must have a transfer reserve. 25 mil spent on a young player, like torres etc would reap a return in the long term. He's not going to depreciate over the next 5 - 6 years and you can then sell him and get your money back if you want.

Again though, you can't know what is going on behind the scene. There may be money available or there might not be.

Exactly, we shouldn't be buying players to make a profit. My point stands. We are now a fully fledged business, all about the money. It's been going like that for a long time but since the boys took over IMHO this has been emphasied.

Also in order to make a profit on a player like torres, bought for 25 million pounds, utd would have to sell him for 40 million to make a 2 million profit. That's if his wages were only £50,000. Try justifying that to joel and the boys. How many players have been sold for 40million +? and how good were they?

kippy

AthanRi,
No offence, but I think you've gotten it all wrong.
If they really wanted to make money "selling" players-why did they let Van Nist go for a lot lot less than what United paid for him, even though there were allegedly higher bids from other teams?
Why also did they sanction an allegedly "overpriced" transfer for Carrick-he is known as a defensive midfielder at the moment-they dont usually make a large amount in the transfer market, so making a profit on him is not an option.
In fairness they havent been aftraid to splash the cash on players thus far-there were a few bought in Januaury also, whom didnt come too cheap.
Since they have taken over, I have not seen any major difference in transfer dealings and have in fact seen the process improve. They now have a cheaper annual debt to service in a stadium with 7000 more seats, as well as a new sponsor paying more money than the last to sponsor them.
I dont see why they have to sell players, and there is no reason for United to become a selling club.

AthAnRi

kippy wrote:

AthanRi,
No offence, but I think you've gotten it all wrong.
If they really wanted to make money "selling" players-why did they let Van Nist go for a lot lot less than what United paid for him, even though there were allegedly higher bids from other teams?
Why also did they sanction an allegedly "overpriced" transfer for Carrick-he is known as a defensive midfielder at the moment-they dont usually make a large amount in the transfer market, so making a profit on him is not an option.
In fairness they havent been aftraid to splash the cash on players thus far-there were a few bought in Januaury also, whom didnt come too cheap.
Since they have taken over, I have not seen any major difference in transfer dealings and have in fact seen the process improve. They now have a cheaper annual debt to service in a stadium with 7000 more seats, as well as a new sponsor paying more money than the last to sponsor them.
I dont see why they have to sell players, and there is no reason for United to become a selling club.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. Time will tell whether I got it 'all' wrong or not.

astrofool

tbf AthanRi, what kippy has stated has been based on facts, like letting RVN go for less money than he's worth and spending alot in January + signing Carrick at any cost. The fact that the refinancing made the interest repayments less can't exactly be seen in a bad light, whereas on the other hand, all your argument is based on conjecture, alot of which has turned out wrong (utd. will never make a profit when selling a player they bought, even Beckham really left at cost price, and made Real a mint in merchandising).

You have to remember, a player like Torres will probably make the money back on wages through shirt sales and trophies won. Claiming you need to sell him (utd. have never been a selling club anyway) for 40m for him to be 'worth' it even in a business situation is completely ridiculous and frankly naiive.

sprinkles

AthAnRi wrote:

Exactly, we shouldn't be buying players to make a profit. My point stands. We are now a fully fledged business, all about the money. It's been going like that for a long time but since the boys took over IMHO this has been emphasied.

Also in order to make a profit on a player like torres, bought for 25 million pounds, utd would have to sell him for 40 million to make a 2 million profit. That's if his wages were only £50,000. Try justifying that to joel and the boys. How many players have been sold for 40million +? and how good were they?

I don't think fguring in wages into the sell on price is valid but on your other point; every club is a business. From the conference clubs to United they all buy players with a view to making money in the long term. Sucess brings in money and good players bring sucess so a balance has to be struck. I think it's crazy to spend 30mil on a 30year old player (Sheva) because you can only offset that cost over 4 - 5 years with no view of selling him on. It's ridiculous unless he's going to make a 5 mil difference to your squad every year.

Football is about money. It's a sad point that we have to get used to but at the end of the day the oney depends on sucess (or rich russians)

Unearthly

Hargreaves apparently doing a press conference today saying that he wants to leave and join United. Surely this would be the end of his Bayern career. The fans will turn against him, he won't be happy at Bayern, whole dressing room might be affected.

Bayern are obviously reluctant to sell but it's getting to the stage where they have no choice

jobonar

Unearthly wrote:

Hargreaves apparently doing a press conference today saying that he wants to leave and join United. Surely this would be the end of his Bayern career. The fans will turn against him, he won't be happy at Bayern, whole dressing room might be affected.

Bayern are obviously reluctant to sell but it's getting to the stage where they have no choice

if this is in fact true then he'd have to leave Bayern or he'll be lynched by players and fans...

its a very drastic step to be taking and i hope it doesnt backfire on him! its good for united that he is showing such desire to play for them!!!

i find this a plus and a negative. a plus that he shows such commitment to joining united yet he's turning his back on a club that he has been with for nearly 10 years and who have been very good to him...

Hobart

Unearthly wrote:

Hargreaves apparently doing a press conference today saying that he wants to leave and join United. Surely this would be the end of his Bayern career. The fans will turn against him, he won't be happy at Bayern, whole dressing room might be affected.

Bayern are obviously reluctant to sell but it's getting to the stage where they have no choice

I disagree. He wants to play hardball. Uli Hoeness will win this one out. His reputation is such that I'd say he would rather let Owen rot on the bench, then be arm twisted into letting him go.

Hargreves is probably making the stupidest move of his short career by holding this press conference.

Don't compare this to the Ballack situation, that was much different. Hargreves has a signed contract until 2010.

The Rooster

I'm sure I read that the Glazers promised £20m a year for 4 years plus another £20m to be used over the 4 years, i.e. effectively £25m per year.

I would amazed if the Glazers had any say in how Gill and Ferguson spend the £20m. Highly unlikely. Presumably also any funds received from player sales go mostly to the Ferguson/Gill transfer fund. On the other hand, if they are looking to dip into the extra £20m I would say they need to present a short business case for Glazer approval.

Perhaps the re-financing increasing debt and term but decreasing payments affected the transfer budget, but I wouldnt have thought so.

Bayern have banned Hargreaves from talking to anyone about Man Utd, so this press conference should be very interesting.

Unearthly

Hobart wrote:

I disagree. He wants to play hardball. Uli Hoeness will win this one out. His reputation is such that I'd say he would rather let Owen rot on the bench, then be arm twisted into letting him go.

Hargreves is probably making the stupidest move of his short career by holding this press conference.

Don't compare this to the Ballack situation, that was much different. Hargreves has a signed contract until 2010.

If he is planning on dumping him into the reserves, I honestly don't see the point. He won't be improving the 1st team sitting on the bench, and on the otherhand you have a club willing to pay big money that he could use to buy a few players with. He is a stubborn fool if he does that

Dressing room morale can affected too, can rub off on other players.

Contracts don't really mean anything thesedays except determining a transfer fee.

Hobart

Unearthly wrote:

If he is planning on dumping him into the reserves, I honestly don't see the point. He won't be improving the 1st team sitting on the bench, and on the otherhand you have a club willing to pay big money that he could use to buy a few players with. He is a stubborn fool if he does that

Dressing room morale can affected too, can rub off on other players.

Contracts don't really mean anything thesedays except determining a transfer fee.

He has already warned Hargreves not to talk publically about a transfer, as he will not be getting one. Hargreves "appears" to be flying in the face of this advice.

I don't think that he will be dumped in the reserves, but if Hargreves does insist on keeping this saga going, and does hold a press conference, he will be punished. Of that I have no doubt.

TBH the whole thing stinks of desperation on Hargreves part. I remeber hearing a story years ago where he was asking his England co-players to see if their respective clubs would show an interest in him. I agree that he had a decent WC, but it wasn't that long ago that the mention of him joining any of the top 5 clubs in the EPL, would have ended in a chorous of laughter.

A contract meens a bit more than the price. He is contracted to that club. They have the choice to keep or sell him (unless there is a release clause that is). They can and, imo, will hang onto him, wether he wants it or not.

jobonar

any idea what time the Hargreaves press conference is at?

Giruilla

I don't think its even confirmed to happen!

jobonar

Giruilla wrote:

I don't think its even confirmed to happen!

sorry one of those days i meant to ask when it was supposed to be at!!

Unearthly

read it on BBC Sport. Usually reliable enough, well more than most sites

AthAnRi

sprinkles wrote:

1. I don't think fguring in wages into the sell on price is valid but on your other point; every club is a business. From the conference clubs to United they all buy players with a view to making money in the long term. Sucess brings in money and good players bring sucess so a balance has to be struck. I think it's crazy to spend 30mil on a 30year old player (Sheva) because you can only offset that cost over 4 - 5 years with no view of selling him on. It's ridiculous unless he's going to make a 5 mil difference to your squad every year.

Football is about money. It's a sad point that we have to get used to but at the end of the day the oney depends on sucess (or rich russians)

astrofool wrote:

tbf AthanRi, 2. what kippy has stated has been based on facts, like letting RVN go for less money than he's worth and spending alot in January + signing Carrick at any cost. 3. The fact that the refinancing made the interest repayments less can't exactly be seen in a bad light, whereas on the other hand, all your argument is based on conjecture, alot of which has turned out wrong (utd. will never make a profit when selling a player they bought, even Beckham really left at cost price, and made Real a mint in merchandising).

You have to remember, a player like Torres will probably make the money back on wages through shirt sales and trophies won. Claiming you need to sell him (utd. have never been a selling club anyway) for 40m for him to be 'worth' it even in a business situation is completely ridiculous and frankly naiive.)

1. Of course it is valid. Wages over a 5 years will cost 12 million. Considering we are paying 60million in Interest alone FACT per year means that every penny spent on wages is a penny lost on profit. This is all the glazers see, if not then their not gonna make good business men. Regardless of wages in order to make a profit on 25 million we would still need to sell torres for 30 million and to sell a player for this would mean he has to be a success.

2. Read Kippys post again and search for the word allegedly. RVN point is only a rumour not a fact. If UTD could have got more for him they would.

3. I was making that point to illustrate that the Shareholders UTD(Pheonix from the flames) newsletter is a very trustworthy source of information. The leaders of this group are die hard utd fans and have had long relationships with very importamt people behind the scenes at old trafford. And it is a bad thing becasue it means that 75% of our gate receipts now go straight to the bankFACT. Pre Glazers it was all profit. The last club to use this type of stategy was who? One guess, they were a massive club and are now lucky to be in existence.

Here is another interesting FACT about Malcolm Glazer he has appointed the entire Glazer family to the board. This means theyre drawing further money out of the club in wages/salaries etc, and if the club goes under, it doesnt matter as theyll have made their wedge and all liability is transferred onto the club, not the Glazers.

Finally it is a FACT that the Glazers stated to the United board that they would be supplying a £25 million transfer fund per year to the club. It is not just 'paper talk' it is a FACT.

You can call me Naive all you like astrofool, however the bottom line is this pre Glazers UTD were a debt free club, now we are paying £60 million pounds in debt. These men have no interest in Football and while you say in order to be making money you need to be succesful it's not how they see it. and that they are business men and it is in there interest to keep the club going. Of course it is but if they only manage to keep the club a float for 5 years, each of the Glazers will have made massive amounts of money while the CLub will be F**ked

Also here is how our spending has gone in in the Glazer Era

Carrick 18.6 (this is the Maximum we will pay)
Shrek (2nd half) 11.5(Signed before Glazers so they have no choice on this one)
Vidic 7
Evra 5.5
Park 4
VDS 2
Foster 1

Total 49.6

Out

Mikel 12
RVN 10.3
Pip 3.5
Kleberson 2.5
Bellend 0.7
Spector 0.5
SEB 0.2

Total 29.7

So if we spend 30 million in the next week they will have kept their promise.

jobonar

Unearthly wrote:

read it on BBC Sport. Usually reliable enough, well more than most sites

BBC says he "could" speak out about it but in the report there's no mention of times or anything!

Linky

Unearthly

They have changed their article. They never said anything about times except he was expected to speak at a conference condeming Bayern on Wednesday.

No other site has it so probably rubbish

Mon a conference though