Years ago I used to work for a very large and well known international company. One of the guys that worked for me had organised a 5 a side football tournament for charity and was planning to name his team after the company we worked for. The tournament was fine, the cause was a good one, and there was no problem at all with those aspects - but he was absolutely not allowed to use the company's name for his football team. Why?
Because of the reputational risk to the company. I appreciate this may be difficult for some folks to understand if they don't have a business background, but put simply, anyone representing the company has to behave, at all times, (whether at work, or not at work) in a way that must not bring any shame, claim, or embarrassment to the company, or raise questions about the standards, integrity or conduct of the company.
So, this was just an "innocent" game of football - and the guy was just wanting to name his team after our company, for a bit of fun. What could possibly be wrong with that?
Well, what if someone on his team got into a fight, or broke another player's leg? What if his team got expelled from the competition for cheating? Or what if there was a discrepancy in the amount of sponsorship they raised and that which actually got paid to the charity?
Any of these things had the potential to reflect badly on the company - even though his 5 a side team had nothing to do with the company at all - and he was the only employee playing in it.
He was refused permission to use the company name in this way. The risks of something going wrong may have been extremely remote, but if they did then reputational risk has the potential to literally wipe millions off the value of the company.
I'm not suggesting for one moment that McBurnie's "laddish" behaviour has the potential to cost our club millions in lost revenues. But, there's a principle here and it's about behaving in a way that reflects the way your employer would wish to be perceived publicly. And neither Sheffield United Football Club or the English Football Association wish for their "ambassadors" - which is what McBurnie is, whether he likes it or not, to behave in what is considered to be an unsporting way.
I don't find this hard to understand at all tbh and I think Wilder has handled it well.