It is more than three months since Dan Ashworth was placed on gardening leave by Newcastle after telling the club he wanted to join Manchester United.

Eighty-five days later - and with the two clubs still far apart on possible compensation - Ashworth is understood to be taking Newcastle to arbitration with Manchester United covering his legal costs.

Although football fans have had to become increasingly used to legal jargon this season - think Everton and Nottingham Forest and the independent tribunals into profit and sustainability regulations (PSR) breaches that could have reshaped the relegation fight - Ashworth's move is still almost unprecedented in the Premier League era.

Where do things stand? When Ashworth finally, belatedly informed Newcastle of his desire to join the Ineos project at Old Trafford the battle lines were drawn early and nothing much has moved since then.

While talk of a PS20m compensation demand is probably fanciful the club want in excess to PS10m to release him from his contract and allow him to start work at Old Trafford.

But Manchester United believe the compensation they should pay is close to PS3m - just slightly over what Newcastle themselves paid Brighton to secure his services in 2022.

Having signed a long-term contract Ashworth could, in theory, be kept on gardening leave until the summer of 2026. Given i understands he is on PS1.5m a year, that is a hefty commitment from Newcastle for someone who is not doing any work at all for them at the moment.

How and why can Ashworth go to arbitration? Arbitration is a form of dispute resolution and is also confidential so don't expect any proceedings between Newcastle and Ashworth - if indeed they go ahead - to come out in public. But there is a big reason why it has come to this.

"The main legal issue - and what I suspect arbitration is focused on here - is that there is a concept in employment law and in UK law generally about restraint of trade," Jonathan Tuck, partner in the employment team at Baker McKenzie and an expert in arbitration proceedings, tells i.

"You can't stop someone from conducting their trade and making their living unless you have a legitimate business interest to do it. I suspect what [Ashworth] is saying is that this is restraint of trade, it's not enforceable and you're not allowed to do that. That's primarily what arbitration will be focused on.

"I saw comments from Sir Jim Ratcliffe comparing this and their new CEO Omar [Berrada] saying that was an amicable agreement with Manchester City but what's happening with Dan is not right.

"What he means is: Newcastle can't keep him out of the market without working for two years, it's breach of the restraint of trade doctrine."

Newcastle are yet to comment publicly over their stance on Ashworth's future.

What is the most likely outcome? New United co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe is keen to push the move for Ashworth along (Photo: PA) Carlos Hurtado, a sports lawyer for Baker McKenzie, believes the threat of arbitration has come from Ashworth for one reason: to speed things up.

He is almost certain that we are approaching end game in this saga and that an agreement will be reached. "I believe that in all cases parties always settle. In the end it's the best for all parties," Hurtado says.

"I don't know exactly what Newcastle want out of it - maybe getting him out of this transfer window, or getting as much money as possible. A reasonable scenario is they find common ground and move forward in the end.

"Football is a very small world and tomorrow you may find yourself in the same situation trying to bring someone in."

Tuck agrees, saying "80 per cent of the time" two parties settle on the doorstep of a tribunal. He suspects the threat of arbitration is probably to give Manchester United some leverage.

"For Man United, if they want him now, before the summer window, there's a good chance that an arbitrator will say 'We agree that gardening leave until 2026 is too long but six months is reasonable'.

"It depends how desperate they are to get him in for the summer - arbitration is risky if they want that.

"Whatever the dynamics are at the moment, Manchester United and Dan Ashworth must think arbitration is a helpful next step because they are the ones driving that.

"Newcastle will, I suspect, be saying to them 'We can hold onto Dan for two years, pay us PS20m' or whatever figure it is. If that's the position Newcastle have taken arbitration certainly will be helpful.

"I would be very surprised if any arbitrator or court says two years is reasonable out of football and that is enforcable.

"We work with lots of industries outside of football that have non-competes and it's about what is a reasonable length of time. We work in some industries where senior people have very confidential information about business strategy, big products in the pipeline.

"So from that perspective Manchester United probably do see an advantage in an arbitrator saying it's not reasonable."

What is the latest with Newcastle's director of football hunt? All signs appear to be pointing towards Dougie Freedman, the Crystal Palace director of football. i understands he interviewed well and ticks the box of Premier League experience, which is what insiders say Newcastle prioritised in their recruitment process.

It will be an interesting divergence from Ashworth's role. He once described the football departments at Newcastle as being like "spokes in a wheel", with his remit to "keep that moving". Sources tell i that Freedman is more of a recruitment specialist.

"He's much more focused on that, he's got the ex-player's mentality and understanding of the game so it is a move in a different direction if they go for Dougie," one source said. He is represented by the same agency as Eddie Howe, which may make his integration into Newcastle a bit smoother.

An appointment could come while Newcastle are in Australia for their post-season tour and that could also speed things up on an Ashworth agreement because it makes it impossible for him to return - even if an arbitrator rules a long period of gardening leave is unlawful.

"If they do bring in a new director of football, Dan's obviously not coming back. It will impact them [in arbitration]," Tuck believes.

"I would think they will want to agree something commercially before that [a replacement] is done."

Will it harm Newcastle's summer business to lose Ashworth? Club sources say not - and there are signs they will be fast out of the blocks in the summer. i understands that they are close to agreeing a deal for Fulham defender Tosin Adarabioyo and there is confidence that they will be able to broker a deal for Bournemouth's Lloyd Kelly.

i revealed the club wanted to sign both defenders on 10 April after Jamaal Lascelles and Sven Botman suffered serious, long-term injuries.

Newcastle also want a forward and right winger, with Miguel Almiron likely to depart this summer. There is also Saudi interest in Martin Dubravka, with Newcastle keen to bring in another goalkeeper.