decisions

Before all that though, there needs to be a decision about Carrick.

Many feel delivering a return to the Champions League – it was predicted after his first two games against Manchester City and Chelsea that his side would be in the bottom half of the table – should be enough to secure him a full-time contract.

Getting rid of Carrick, the argument goes, would be the most risky option.

But there are two schools of thought.

The first is that Carrick gets the job because he deserves the chance, it goes wrong next season and the United hierarchy are derided for following the Ole Gunnar Solskjaer model – even though that downplays the Norwegian’s achievement of delivering successive top-four finishes, something no coach has done since Sir Alex Ferguson quit in 2013.

The other is that Carrick is replaced by a more experienced manager, who struggles to adapt and then the hierarchy are accused of trying to fix something that wasn’t broken.

This decision is not made easier by the knowledge that Paris St-Germain are confident the standout candidate, Luis Enrique, will sign a new deal with them, and even if he does not, will want wages among the highest in the world to change clubs.

The practicalities of trying to bring in someone like Julian Nagelsman – whose contract with Germany does not expire until 2028 and could be involved in the World Cup final a day after Manchester United’s first pre-season game against Wrexham in Helsinki – make it an unviable option.

Andoni Iraola is well liked but, as Thomas Frank, who spoke to United in 2024, discovered at Tottenham, managing a progressive, smaller Premier League club is a whole different world to dealing with the biggest.

No-one knew what results Carrick would deliver when he was asked to take over until the end of the season. However, one thing United’s powerbrokers were certain about was that he would not be swamped by the sheer scale of what he was taking on.

Carrick met Sir Jim Ratcliffe for a cup of tea and a casual chat last week. Time will tell how important that brew was.

Barring an unimaginable sequence of results, Old Trafford will host Champions League football again next season.

But one senses for those running the club, their most significant work is about to begin.

April 16 (UPI) — Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on Thursday testified before seven congressional committees, often clashing with Democrats about decisions he has made about vaccines and department priorities.

The testimony is Kennedy’s first trip to the Capitol this year and the first time that he has appeared before Congress in more than seven months, The Washington Post reported.

In addition to unilaterally remaking the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s vaccine advisory committee and the agency’s recommended childhood vaccine schedule — which were blocked by a federal judge in March — he has changed the Food and Drug Administration‘s recommendations on diet and shepherded medications through federal approval processes while allegedly ignoring data on them.

Kennedy also was asked by members of Congress about the Trump administration’s 12.5% budget request decrease, which amounts to about $16 billion that it sought for its fiscal year 2027 budget proposal, NPR reported.

“Our children are the sickest generation in modern history — decades of failed policy, captured agencies and profit-driven systems have caused it,” Kennedy said during a hearing before the House Ways and Means Committee.

“Parents across this country demanded change — and we are delivering it,” he said.

Kennedy said that the measles vaccine “certainly” could have saved the life of a child who died in Texas last year during an outbreak in the state.

More than 1,700 measles cases have been reported through the first 3 1/2 months of 2026, compared to more than 2,200 reported in all of 2025.

He also was asked by Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Calif., about ending an influenza vaccine public awareness campaign while investing money in marketing efforts for his remade food pyramid.

“You suspended this pro-vaccine messaging campaign, but somehow you’re spending taxpayer dollars to drink milk, shirtless in a hot tub with Kid Rock?” Sanchez asked.

Kennedy also was accused of “diminishing science” by Rep. Bradley Scott, D-Ill., with his support for $5.7 billion in cuts to the National Institutes of Health meant for drug development.

“Nobody wants to make the cuts,” Kennedy said in response to several questions about reducing the HHS budget, but said the nation needs “to tighten our belt” because of the national debt, which he blamed on Congress.

Manchester United were left furious about “astonishing” and “baffling” refereeing decisions as two penalties were awarded and one was not in their thrilling 2-2 draw at Bournemouth.

Harry Maguire’s special day – following his England recall – was spoiled by his sending off at Vitality Stadium, but it was the performance of the officials that had United fuming.

Maguire, who will return to the England squad for the first time in almost two years for upcoming friendlies with Uruguay and Japan, was sent off for pulling back Evanilson inside the box as Manchester United led 2-1 with 10 minutes to go.

Junior Kroupi subsequently scored the penalty but the decision not to award Manchester United an earlier spot-kick left interim manager Michael Carrick furious – especially after his side had been awarded a penalty for what he deemed to be a similar challenge earlier in the match.

The penalty the visitors were not given came when Amad Diallo appeared to be pulled back inside the box by Adrien Truffert, with Manchester United leading 1-0 after Bruno Fernandes’ penalty.

Carrick, who described the decisions made as “baffling”, said: “My first [thought] is he definitely got one of them wrong, because he’s given one penalty for the same thing that he’s not given one as a two-armed grab.

“So the Matheus Cunha one, he gives, the second one on Amad he doesn’t, which is, I think, almost identical, really, two hands on someone in the box, and they go over and they’re in control of the ball.

“Massive moment and I don’t understand how you can give one and not the other – it’s crazy. It’s as obvious as you can get.

“It’s clear, if that’s what he believes is a penalty to start with then the second one has to be. I don’t understand how you can’t give that. And then the goal and after that it was chaos. It’s astonishing.”

Manchester United captain Fernandes, meanwhile, felt that if Bournemouth‘s penalty was given for a foul by Maguire, then so should one for the Diallo incident.

“I think we could have gone 2-0 up, and then we ended up conceding a goal, not getting a penalty and then we get a penalty against, where more or less it’s the same situation as Amad,” he said.

“One is awarded as a penalty, the other one not. I know it’s difficult for the referee to give two penalties in the same game for the same team but what I don’t understand is why VAR doesn’t get involved in that situation.”