Manchester United aren’t in action this weekend but that hasn’t stopped the club dominating headlines off the pitch

While their Premier League counterparts gear up for FA Cup fourth round fixtures, Manchester United enjoy a weekend break to rest and recuperate. United were knocked out by Brighton at the first hurdle in the previous round, leaving the league as their sole remaining priority after failing to qualify for Europe and suffering an early Carabao Cup exit.

Michael Carrick’s side won’t be back in action until February 23, when they face Everton. By the time that Monday night kick-off gets underway, they could be out of the Champions League places, with Chelsea and Liverpool breathing down their necks.

Interim boss Carrick wasn’t backed in the transfer market during the winter window, having only been appointed in January after Ruben Amorim’s departure. Regardless of whether Carrick or someone else is in the dugout next term, speculation abounds regarding potential ins and outs.

Off the field, recent remarks from part-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe have also sparked debate. Here are our latest headlines from Old Trafford.

Ensure our latest sport headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as Preferred Source in your Google search settings

Rashford comeback supported

Ex-Manchester United coach Rene Meulensteen reckons Marcus Rashford’s Old Trafford journey might not be finished. Rashford spent time on loan at Aston Villa last season and is currently on a season-long arrangement with Barcelona.

The Catalan giants hold an option to make the move permanent for just over £26million at the end of the season if they are happy with Rashford’s output. Nevertheless, Meulensteen hasn’t dismissed the possibility of the academy product returning now that Carrick – previously an on-field colleague of the forward – is at the helm.

“It could be a route back for Marcus Rashford at Man Utd, definitely,” Meulensteen told BetGoat. “I think Marcus is still as ‘red’ as anyone because he came through the ranks as a young kid, and that will never go away, that will never leave him.

“It’s the same with Scott McTominay. Both players have done extremely well wherever they’ve gone. But I think it was good for Marcus to have that spell away, first of all at Aston Villa, but now at Barcelona. It’s a different culture, a different language, and a different style. Every week is different.

“The Premier League is different. It’s so much more demanding than any league in the world. And I think he’s enjoying his football, and that’s the most important thing. He needs to enjoy his football.”

Ratcliffe addresses backlash to comments

Sir Jim Ratcliffe faced widespread criticism following remarks in which he suggested the UK was being ‘colonised’ by immigrants. Supporter group The 1958 were amongst those who challenged the co-owner, who has now released a subsequent statement regarding his comments.

Advertisement

“I am sorry that my choice of language has offended some people in the UK and Europe and caused concern but it is important to raise the issue of controlled and well-managed immigration that supports economic growth,” Ratcliffe said in a statement shared on Thursday. “My comments were made while answering questions about UK policy at the European Industry Summit in Antwerp, where I was discussing the importance of economic growth, jobs, skills and manufacturing in the UK.

“My intention was to stress that governments must manage migration alongside investment in skills, industry and jobs so that long-term prosperity is shared by everyone. It is critical that we maintain an open debate on the challenges facing the UK.”

Previously, Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham had criticised Ratcliffe, saying: “These comments go against everything for which Manchester has traditionally stood: a place where people of all races and faiths have pulled together over centuries to build our city and our institutions – including Manchester United FC.”

FOLLOW OUR MAN UNITED FB PAGE! Latest news and analysis via the MEN’s Manchester United Facebook page

Sky Sports discounted Premier League and EFL package

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

£49

£35

Sky

Get Sky Sports here

Sky has slashed the price of its Essential TV and Sky Sports bundle for the 2025/26 season, saving members £336 and offering more than 1,400 live matches across the Premier League, EFL and more.

Advertisement

Sky will show at least 215 live Premier League games this season, an increase of up to 100 more.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Thursday revoked a scientific finding that long has been the central basis for U.S. action to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change, the most aggressive move by the Republican president to roll back climate regulations.

The rule finalized by the Environmental Protection Agency rescinds a 2009 government declaration known as the endangerment finding that determined that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare. The Obama-era finding is the legal underpinning of nearly all climate regulations under the Clean Air Act for motor vehicles, power plants and other pollution sources that are heating the planet.

The repeal eliminates all greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars and trucks and could unleash a broader undoing of climate regulations on stationary sources such as power plants and oil and gas facilities, experts say. Legal challenges are near certain.

President Donald Trump called the move “the single largest deregulatory action in American history, by far,” while EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin called the endangerment finding “the Holy Grail of federal regulatory overreach.”

Trump called the endangerment finding “one of the greatest scams in history,” claiming falsely that it “had no basis in fact” or law. “On the contrary, over the generations, fossil fuels have saved millions of lives and lifted billions of people out of poverty all over the world,” Trump said at a White House ceremony, although scientists across the globe agree that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are driving catastrophic heat waves and storms, droughts and sea level rise.

Environmental groups described the move as the single biggest attack in U.S. history against federal authority to address climate change. Evidence backing up the endangerment finding has only grown stronger in the 17 years since it was approved, they said.

The EPA also said it will propose a two-year delay to a Biden-era rule restricting greenhouse gas emissions by cars and light trucks. And the agency will end incentives for automakers who install automatic start-stop ignition systems in their vehicles. The device is intended to reduce emissions, but Zeldin said “everyone hates” it.

Zeldin, a former Republican congressman who was tapped by Trump to lead EPA last year, has criticized his predecessors in Democratic administrations, saying that in the name of tackling climate change, they were “willing to bankrupt the country.”

The endangerment finding “led to trillions of dollars in regulations that strangled entire sectors of the United States economy, including the American auto industry,” Zeldin said. “The Obama and Biden administrations used it to steamroll into existence a left-wing wish list of costly climate policies, electric vehicle mandates and other requirements that assaulted consumer choice and affordability.”

The endangerment finding and the regulations based on it “didn’t just regulate emissions, it regulated and targeted the American dream. And now the endangerment finding is hereby eliminated,” Zeldin said.

Supreme Court has upheld the endangerment finding

The Supreme Court ruled in a 2007 case that planet-warming greenhouse gases, caused by the burning of oil and other fossil fuels, are air pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

Since the high court’s decision, in a case known as Massachusetts v. EPA, courts have uniformly rejected legal challenges to the endangerment finding, including a 2023 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The endangerment finding is widely considered the legal foundation that underpins a series of regulations intended to protect against threats made increasingly severe by climate change. That includes deadly floods, extreme heat waves, catastrophic wildfires and other natural disasters in the United States and around the world.

Gina McCarthy, a former EPA administrator who served as White House climate adviser in the Biden administration, called the Trump administration’s actions reckless. “This EPA would rather spend its time in court working for the fossil fuel industry than protecting us from pollution and the escalating impacts of climate change,” she said.

Former President Barack Obama said on X that repeal of the endangerment finding will make Americans “less safe, less healthy and less able to fight climate change — all so the fossil fuel industry can make even more money.”

Dr. Lisa Patel, a pediatrician and executive director of the Medical Society Consortium on Climate and Health, said Trump’s action “prioritizes the profits of big oil and gas companies and polluters over clean air and water” and children’s health.

“As a result of this repeal, I’m going to see more sick kids come into the Emergency Department having asthma attacks and more babies born prematurely,” she said in a statement. “My colleagues will see more heart attacks and cancer in their patients.”

David Doniger, a climate expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said Trump and Zeldin are trying to use repeal of the finding as a “kill shot’’ that would allow the administration to make nearly all climate regulations invalid. The repeal could erase current limits on greenhouse gas pollution from cars, factories, power plants and other sources and could hinder future administrations from imposing rules to address global warming.

The EPA action follows an executive order from Trump that directed the agency to submit a report on “the legality and continuing applicability” of the endangerment finding. Conservatives and some congressional Republicans have long sought to undo what they consider overly restrictive and economically damaging rules to limit greenhouse gases that cause global warming.

Withdrawing the endangerment finding “is the most important step taken by the Trump administration so far to return to energy and economic sanity,” said Myron Ebell, a conservative activist who has questioned the science behind climate change.

Tailpipe emission limits targeted

Zeldin and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy have moved to drastically scale back limits on tailpipe emissions from cars and trucks. Rules imposed under Democratic President Joe Biden were intended to encourage U.S. automakers to build and sell more electric vehicles. The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.

The Trump administration announced a proposal in December to weaken vehicle mileage rules for the auto industry, loosening regulatory pressure on automakers to control pollution from gasoline-powered cars and trucks. The EPA said its two-year delay to a Biden-era rule on greenhouse gas emissions by cars and light trucks will give the agency time to develop a plan that better reflects the reality of slower EV sales, while promoting consumer choice and lowering prices.

Environmental groups said the plan would keep polluting, gas-burning cars and trucks on U.S. roads for years to come, threatening the health of millions of Americans, particularly children and the elderly.

___

Follow the AP’s coverage of the Environmental Protection Agency at https://apnews.com/hub/us-environmental-protection-agency

World Cup-bound Scotland will play Switzerland, Slovenia and North Macedonia in Group B1 of the 2026/27 Nations League after their relegation from League A that followed a dismal play-off loss to Greece, while Wales face Portugal, Norway and Denmark in Group A4 after being promoted last time around.

For Reform parliamentary candidate and former academic Matt Goodwin: “Englishness is an ethnicity that is deeply rooted in a people that can trace their roots back over generations.” By contrast, he argues, liberal progressives believe “anybody can be English as long as they sign a piece of paper and identify with Englishness.”

This is not a novel definition, and for some, it may be completely uncontroversial. It’s not surprising that some people living in England can trace their ancestors back many generations.

But attempting to define a particular “ethnicity” is also an attempt to determine who is (and who is not) part of a given group. Policing these boundaries has serious consequences.

The idea of essential groups

To speak of an identity as one that can be traced “back over generations”, is to speak of human reproduction and generational transmission. These are central ideas in how, historically, people have been categorised into racial groups.

The biological sciences have a long history of dividing humans up. Take 18th-century Swedish biologist Carl Linnaeus’s Systema Naturae, the most influential attempt to classify the natural world, and the basis of contemporary zoological nomenclature. Linnaeus subdivided humans into four varieties that many of us would balk at today and has no basis in modern science: white Europeans, reddish Americans, tawny Asians, and blackish Africans.

In the centuries since, the number of groups has changed, as well as the language used to describe them. But the idea that we can inherit some innate qualities via generational inheritance – essentialism – underwrites these influential ideas. Essentialism would have it that you’re born as part of a group and all the “identifying” in the world cannot change that.

These divisions can also generate a sense of entitlement to certain rights or resources for one group over another. They have been used to justify violence, discrimination – some of the most shameful moments in human history. Indeed, racial essentialism became so dangerous that Unesco published a series of statements to flag the dangers of the impulse to divide ourselves like this.

The limits of categories

The world is in a constant state of push and pull. People move or are moved, for all kinds of reasons all the time. They settle and reproduce in different places. This is an empirical truth that limits the utility of essentialist ideas.

Essentialist thinking requires us to say both where, and when, we are from. Some will find it quite straightforward to demonstrate membership of a particular group but others will not. Many of us won’t be able to say that all of our ancestors (as far back as history allows us to trace) were all born in England.

Take Dame Kelly Holmes. She was one of the public figures Spectator editor Michael Gove mentioned when he interviewed Goodwin on this and other subjects. He asked: “Would you say that [she is] not really English?” Holmes is mixed race (a term that also leans on the idea of essential categories that somehow merge). She served in the army, won gold medals for England and Great Britain and received the honorific of Dame. But if only some of her “roots” can be traced “back over generations”, then does she not qualify as English?

Many of us will confound the groups that we are made to squeeze into because, ultimately, our roots long predate contemporary ideas of nation, identity and group.

Why do people invoke these ideas?

For me, what’s important here is not disproving the essential existence of groups, but trying to trace why they are being mobilised. Why do politicians want to define these categories?

Groups, identities and communities are made and remade. We come to feel a part of a collective. And this feeling is generated often in ways that seem somehow naturally occurring. We pray at the same place of worship; we listen to the same kinds of music. But our affiliations to particular groups do not exist in the wild.

Categories have social power. When you define a collective, it makes it possible to speak to that collective and to mobilise it. Collectives can be delineated in more and less definitive ways. Essentialist thinking is some of the most definitive and inflexible of all. At its worst, those outside a group are denied access to respect and safety.

So, why distinguish between those who belong and those who do not? Why debate whether public figures with ancestors born elsewhere, but born and raised in England, are “actually” English? Why evoke (but not invoke) essentialised ideas of race, using words like ethnicity?

And if we know that cultivating boundaries of belonging can generate a sense of entitlement, then who risks being denied access, and to what? In a period of economic difficulty when public resources are already stretched, what is the next logical step after enough people can be made to agree on a clear definition of who is or is not English?

The essentialist claims we are hearing in the UK are not new, but they are powerful. So when politicians like Goodwin assert a desire to open a public debate on the categories they have selected – and even defined – we have to ask what purpose it serves.

NEW YORK (AP) — Kathy Ruemmler, the top lawyer at storied investment bank Goldman Sachs and former White House counsel to President Barack Obama, announced her resignation Thursday, after emails between her and Jeffrey Epstein showed a close relationship where she described him as an “older brother” and downplayed his sex crimes.

Ruemmler said in a statement that she would “step down as Chief Legal Officer and General Counsel of Goldman Sachs as of June 30, 2026.”

Up until her resignation, Ruemmler repeatedly tried to distance herself from the emails and other correspondence and had been defiant that she would not resign from Goldman’s top legal post, which she had held since 2020.

While Ruemmler has called Epstein a “monster” in recent statements, she had a much different relationship with Epstein before he was arrested a second time for sex crimes in 2019 and later killed himself in a Manhattan jail. Ruemmler called Epstein “Uncle Jeffrey” in emails and said she adored him.

In a statement before her resignation, a Goldman Sachs spokesperson said Ruemmler “regrets ever knowing him.”

In her statement Thursday, Ruemmler said: “Since I joined Goldman Sachs six years ago, it has been my privilege to help oversee the firm’s legal, reputational, and regulatory matters; to enhance our strong risk management processes; and to ensure that we live by our core value of integrity in everything we do. My responsibility is to put Goldman Sachs’ interests first.”

Goldman CEO David Solomonsaid in a separate statement: “As one of the most accomplished professionals in her field, Kathy has also been a mentor and friend to many of our people, and she will be missed. I accepted her resignation, and I respect her decision.”

During her time in private practice after she left the White House in 2014, Ruemmler received several expensive gifts from Epstein, including luxury handbags and a fur coat. The gifts were given after Epstein had already been convicted of sex crimes in 2008 and was registered as a sex offender.

“So lovely and thoughtful! Thank you to Uncle Jeffrey!!!” Ruemmler wrote to Epstein in 2018.

Historically, Wall Street frowns on gift-giving between clients and bankers or Wall Street lawyers, particularly high-end gifts that could pose a conflict of interest. Goldman Sachs requires its employees to get preapproval before receiving or giving gifts from clients, according to the company’s code of conduct, partly in order to not run afoul of anti-bribery laws.

As late as December, Goldman CEO David Solomon described Ruemmler as an “excellent lawyer” and said she had his full faith and backing.

GameCentral offers an overview of Thursday night’s State of Play and is disappointed at the lack of new first party game announcements.

Despite almost every State of Play, for the last several years, being a disappointment there was plenty of optimism left for the one on Thursday night, not least because it promised to be the longest one ever, outside of Sony’s not-E3 showcases.

Viewed from a distance it was very good, with a lot of exciting new games, but the one thing it was missing was anything new made by any of Sony’s internal, first party developers.

There weren’t many Sony published games of any kind but the few that were featured had either been announced previously or were made by external third party studios (well, technically we don’t know who’s making the God Of War remake trilogy but it’s unlikely to be Santa Monica Studio).

Without wanting to go over all ground all this stems from the fact that, a couple of years into the current generation, Sony suddenly got it into their heads that all their studios should pivot from primarily single-player games to making live service titles.

That proved to be a complete disaster and while it’s assumed that they’ve since reversed course they’ve never actually said so. Sony hardly talks about anything in the open anymore but while some optimists theorise that they have seen sense it takes at least five years to make a triple-A game and so there’s been chance yet for the change of plan – if it actually happened – to bear fruit.

The PlayStation 5 is six years old this year and most Sony studios have only released one game on the console. Some, like Days Gone maker Bend Studio, haven’t made anything new for the format at all. Even Naughty Dog hasn’t produced anything but remakes and remasters so far.

We’ve currently no clue what Bluepoint Games, Team Asobi, Polyphony Digital, or Media Molecule are working on at the moment (you can guess but they’ve not announced anything). Even Santa Monica Studio is a mystery as they only seem to be overseeing the two new God Of War games and haven’t announced a new title themselves since 2022’s Ragnarök.

Any hope that Sony would allow a peek behind the curtain during the latest State of Play was quickly dashed, with the vast majority of games being third party. Sony is publishing some of these, such as Kena: Scars Of Kosmora – a sequel to 2021’s not very good Kena: Bridge Of Spirits – but they’re not made by any of their internal studios.

Sucker Punch did unveil free DLC for Ghost Of Yōtei, but while Marathon, Saros, and Marvel Tōkon: Fighting Souls (which is not made by an internal developer) all looked good they’d already been announced some time ago. So we really learnt very little about what Sony themselves are planning for the future.

At this point it seems clear there’s never going to be a big unveiling of multiple new first party titles. The E3 days of three or four new games being announced at once are gone and this State of Play was perhaps the final proof of that.

That leaves a gaping hole in the PlayStation 5’s armoury but the only thing to do is take solace in the third party games that were showcased instead.

The John Wick game looked promising and the tsunami of Konami announcements was great, even if we wish the new Castlevania game had been a bigger budget 3D title.

Legacy Of Kain: Defiance Remastered was a surprise, as was current gen remaster Dead Or Alive 6: Last Round. Control: Resonant looked great (non-humanoid enemies in a Remedy game, at last!), Crimson Moon seemed promising, and the Rayman remaster continues to seem a very strange idea – given it wasn’t very good even 30 years ago.

Yakoh Shinobi Ops appeared to be a cross between Tenchu and Shadow Tactics: Blades Of The Shogun and, like Krafton’s bizarre chicken monster game Project Windless, seems to be a self-imposed PlayStation console exclusive.

With new looks at Star Wars: Galactic Racer and 007 First Light as well it was a good State of Play, it’s just that there was very little about it that was exclusive to PlayStation and nothing that suggested Sony’s first party output is ever going to ramp up beyond just one or two new games a year.

Email gamecentral@metro.co.uk, leave a comment below, follow us on Twitter.

To submit Inbox letters and Reader’s Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use our Submit Stuff page here.

For more stories like this, check our Gaming page.

MORE: New Disney CEO to make gaming a big priority but that may not be a good thing

MORE: GTA 6 being given away for free in Norway if you have a baby on launch day

MORE: Why there’ll be no High On Life 2 review from us today

This figure is part of a wider national concern, with 73,250 children in England who were subject to a Child in Need assessment identified as having a parent who misused alcohol.

Kam Thandi, NSPCC Helpline director, said: “Most parents and carers who drink alcohol do so in moderation, which doesn’t present an increased risk of harm to their children.

“However, when they take it in large quantities over a long period of time it can lead to abuse and neglect with serious consequences for their future.”

The NSPCC also reported receiving 9,192 contacts relating to concerns about parental substance misuse.

Reports included people reporting hearing arguments and furniture being thrown, seeing parents inebriated and collapsed, and children appearing dirty and neglected.

The charity shared its data during Children of Alcoholics Week, which runs from February 8 to 14 and is led by the National Association for Children of Alcoholics (Nacoa).

Hilary Henriques, chief executive of Nacoa, said: “Every child deserves to live a creative and meaningful life.

“Sadly, when alcohol is the family secret, children are more likely to experience difficult situations with family violence, neglect, and other problems.”

Children and adults affected by parental drinking are encouraged to reach out for help.

Childline is available 24 hours a day on 0800 1111, while Nacoa UK can be contacted on 0800 358 3456.

Violet has been in the care of Dogs Trust Darlington since May last year after being found as a stray.

Vets discovered she had bilateral mild hip dysplasia and a luxating patella, an issue which was causing problems with her knee. 

While in Dogs Trust care, Violet underwent successful patella surgery, received regular physiotherapy and has since recovered well.

The four-year-old was found as a stray and has been at the charity since last May (Image: DOGS TRUST DARLINGTON)

The four-year-old also had her ears cropped before coming into the charity’s care. Dogs Trust described the procedure as “cruel and unnecessary”.

Following her operation, “playful” Violet is now ready for adoption.

Nikki Holroyd, manager at Dogs Trust Darlington, said: “Violet is such a special dog, we all adore her. It’s impossible not to fall for her charms when you meet her. 

“Everything she’s been through – surgery, physiotherapy, vet visits – she has taken in her stride, with her happy nature and zest for life. 

“Now Violet is available for adoption, we can’t wait for her to find her forever family as she has so much love to give. Violet is eager to please, and is a big foodie, so she is keen to learn when a treat is offered.  

“She is very playful and is a big fan of toys. She loves to prance around carrying a soft toy, which she has great pride in showing off to everyone she meets.

Violet with one of her many toys (Image: DOGS TRUST DARLINGTON)

“Violet will also happily entertain herself with her toys and loves to snooze with a soft toy in bed.”

Dogs Trust Darlington said Violet is looking for her forever home where she is the only pet.

She could live with older children and would love a garden where she could relax and play.

The Pocket American Bully is still receiving physiotherapy following her operation, which will be shown to adopters so it can continue at home.

If you would like to see Violet and the rest of the dog’s waiting to meet their special someone, you can do so by visiting: www.dogstrust.org.uk/darlington.

Lewis Mullen was handed an extended 11-year sentence after a jury found him guilty of killing Jack Trainner, 27, near his home in Port Glasgow, Inverclyde.

A 25-year-old man who killed his friend in a knife attack outside his victim’s flat has been jailed for nine years at the High Court in Dundee.

Lewis Mullen was handed an extended 11-year sentence after a jury found him guilty of killing Jack Trainner, 27, near his home in Port Glasgow, Inverclyde. The jury accepted there had been provocation during a row between the friends on April 27 2024 and cleared Mullen of the more serious charge of murder.

However, they rejected his claim that he had acted in self-defence and that he had been carrying the large knife to gut fish. The court heard he had two previous convictions for carrying weapons and the two-year extension was added because he was assessed as posing a high risk to the public.

Lord Renucci told Mullen: “The trial has shown not just that you are prepared to carry a weapon in a public place, but also that you are someone who is prepared to use that knife. Had you not left your house with a knife and removed it from your rucksack, and followed him armed with the knife into flats, then this offence would not have occurred.

Advertisement

“You claimed you were carrying the knife for fishing and you saw no issue with this. You might not see an issue with it, but the court and society does. You were not fishing when you went out to source drugs. No-one requires a blade that size to gut fish. It is disappointing that one thing missing in the report is any real expression of remorse.

“It highlights your propensity to carry weapons. I have read victim impact statements from the victim’s mother and ex-partner on behalf of his children. You should be under no illusion about the scale of their loss and the lifelong impact upon them.”

Counsel for Mullen, Thomas Ross KC, said his client had been “self-medicating” by taking drugs and was under the influence of street valium at the time of the attack. Mullen attacked Mr Trainner by repeatedly stabbing him on the knife and body. The trial heard that Mr Trainner had pulled out a knife initially.

The court had heard how the men would sometimes meet up to play video games together. Mullen said he turned up at Mr Trainner’s flat on the day of the killing in April 2024 thinking “it would be like any other time and he would invite me in”.

But he added: “When I knocked, I could see that he was aggressive right away”. A struggle then spilled outside before Mullen followed Mr Trainner back into the common close of the block of flats.

The killer said his victim went at him with a knife before Mullen struck him with a purple-bladed weapon that he had in rucksack. Mullen said he believed he had only struck his friend once in the chest, but it emerged he also had a cut near his eye.

Asked by his KC Thomas Ross how long he had to “assess his options” that day, he replied: “Seconds – it all happened so quickly”. He said he believed that, had he turned his back, he would have been stabbed.

Mullen left the scene, but later handed himself in to police after he discovered Mr Trainner had died. During the trial, prosecutor Wojciech Jajdelski asked Mullen why he had not simply “walked away” after they had gone outside.

He replied: “We were friends. This was not the Jack I knew. I thought I could calm him down.” After the verdict, the court was told Mullen had a number of previous convictions, but had never previously received a prison sentence.

Staff at the Severfield PLC site in Lostock are walking out next week after not being given a bump in pay by bosses, according to the GMB union.

It says that more than 90 per cent of GMB members at the site, working as welders, platers and machine operators, voted in favour of strike action.

The company, which has provided the steel work for iconic projects like the Shard and the new Everton stadium, says it suffered a loss and won’t provide a pay rise.

GMB members have been conducting an overtime ban this week, and will start with one full day of strike action next Monday, February 16, followed by two full days of strike action the following week, on February 23 and 24.

Over 100 workers at a steel firm are set to strike (Image: Google Maps)

GMB regional organiser John Weir said: “No worker anywhere deserves to be offered literally nothing.

“GMB members at Severfield do highly skilled work, in an industry where such talent is in short supply.

“Severfield is a huge company, with revenues of nearly half a billion pounds.

“Regardless of losses in a single year, that workers should shoulder the burden is unacceptable.

“GMB has provided a range of options to settle this dispute, but Severfield continues to say zero per cent is their final offer, so our members are left with no choice but to strike.”

Severfield declined to comment.