Since its arrival in Manchester, Michelin-recommended new wave Thai BBQ favourite District has staked its reputation on two things: fantastically surreal, delicious food and an extremely inflexible tasting menu.
Until recently its diners have had two choices, opt for the ten-course tasting menu or spring for the twelve, and whilst everyone I’ve ever known to go has swooned in delight over the whole experience, there’s no denying it hardly makes for a cheap night out (or an easily organised one).
Deposits have always been required up front, and adaptions have famously never been made for a customer’s dislikes, or even religious needs. It’s for this reason, and this reason alone, that until last week I’d never made it over – despite wanting desperately to go.
Simply put, I’d just struggled to find anyone prepared to give up a whole evening (and a shed load of cash) to come with me. Amazing, I know, but thankfully, that’s all now changed.
Last year, the kitchen made headlines after getting embroiled in a ‘religious diet’ row with a Jewish customer who’d taken umbrage with its refund policy.
The whole affair culminated with District posting the entire altercation to its social media pages, alongside a caption stating it ‘will not be bullied or threatened into returning deposits’.
ADVERTISEMENT
During the row, the customer had asked, “why not shout loud on your homepage ‘We don’t cater for Jews’”. Still, they held firm.
A year on and it seems that external pressures may have caused that iron will to buckle, because for the first time ever the Michelin-acclaimed restaurant has moved to offer dishes individually.
Image: The Manc Eats
Image: The Manc Eats
In a complete change of direction, diners can now pop in off the cuff to enjoy a few plates and a couple of drinks. Personally, I think it’s the best news ever, but then I would. It’ll be much easier to get my friends in now.
ADVERTISEMENT
Suddenly one of the best restaurants in the city has become so much more accessible, and its timing couldn’t be better. After all, we’re all getting poorer, and whilst not everyone has £100 to spend on dinner, everyone deserves a taste of the magic happening in the kitchen here.
Whilst the restaurant maintains that diners can either curate their own District experience or simply pop in for a few dishes, on our visit it is very much a small plate, tapas-style service, with everything appearing on the table in front of us in quick succession.
Translucent stone bass (£9) floats alien-like in its dish with crispy purple yam antennae suspended above a shimmering nam jim, whilst a pinky-purple pigeon satay (£9) is rich and gamey, dressed with sweetcorn, pumpkin seeds and crisped turnip all unfolding on the plate like a flower in bloom.
Every dish here is a surprise, ranging from a beautifully fresh salad of peach, pear, ginger and shrimp floss, to chicken fat rice, which comes showered in a generous helping of crumbed crispy skin.
ADVERTISEMENT
Image: The Manc Eats
Image: The Manc Eats
That rule extends into the desserts too. Homemade ‘tangfastic’ tamarind and chicken fat fudge sweets appear, suspended, on their own white marble platform like some sort of futuristic offering.
Elsewhere, a calamansi curd pavlova with sheeps yoghurt and passion fruit reinvents any preconceived notions I might have had about Thai food – or pavlova for that matter.
As Marina O’Loughiling wrote in her review of District for The Times last year, this is “Thai, but not as we know it”.
Speaking on the change of direction for the restaurant, owner Ben Humphries said: “We are passionate about creating the highest quality experience for our customers.
ADVERTISEMENT
“Our aim is to capture the essence of Thai flavours whilst maintaining the highest quality produce, suppliers and dishes.
“Changing our service style will give us creative freedom in the kitchen. We can develop dishes that don’t have to fit into a tasting menu format. We will also have the opportunity to offer daily changing special dishes.”
The new menu is available now with bookings being taken under ‘New Wave Thai’ on District’s bookings page here.
Feature image – The Manc Eats
News
Independent review into police actions during Manchester synagogue terror attack finds ‘no misconduct’
Emily Sergeant
An independent review into the terror attack at a synagogue in Crumpsall last week has concluded there was ‘no misconduct’ by the police.
The investigation was carried out by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) following the shocking knife and car attack, which took place last Thursday 2 October on Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, at the Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation Synagogue.
Two men sadly lost their lives during the attack – Adrian Daulby, 53, who is believed to have been shot dead by Greater Manchester Police (GMP) while trying to stop the attacker from entering the synagogue, and Melvin Cravitz, 66, a worshipper who also helped stop the attacker.
The attacker has been named as 35-year-old Jihad al Shamie – a 35-year-old British citizen of Syrian descent who lived in Prestwich – who at the time was on bail for an alleged rape, before being shot dead by police.
Statement from Chief Constable Sir Stephen Watson following an update from the Independent Office for Police Conduct. This comes after last week's attack at Heaton Park Synagogue. pic.twitter.com/5tQQKeNaTh
The IOPC says its investigation is ‘mandatory’ in situations where police use of force may have resulted in the death of a member of the public.
Their investigation looked at the actions and decision-making of the officers involved in the incident.
“Over the coming days, we will continue to review the substantial amount of evidence gathered up to now, and will begin the process of obtaining more detailed statements from police witnesses,” the IOPC said in a statment.
GMP’s Chief Constable, Sir Stephen Watson, says he ‘welcomes’ the IOPC’s finding that no misconduct is apparent in the actions required of officers in ‘bringing this dreadful attack to an end’.
An independent review into police actions during the Manchester synagogue terror attack has found ‘no misconduct’ / Credit: GMP
He said in a statement addressing the matter: “Our thoughts will always be with the families and loved ones of those directly affected by this tragedy together with the wider community across Greater Manchester and beyond. Our significant presence and determination to protect everyone from all faith communities across our city region will continue unabated.”
With the IOPC’s investigation into the incident still ongoing, CC Watson assured ‘GMP is committed to openness, transparency, and candour’.
“In respect of all our previous dealings with [al Shamie], and we have therefore asked the IOPC to include this aspect in their ongoing review,” CC Watson continued.
“This includes previous reports of harassment, and an arrest for reports of rape over the past year, for which he was on bail at the time of the attack.”
Featured Image – GMP
News
Breakaway competition R360 issues statement after rubgy unions warn players of sanctions
Danny Jones
Prospective breakaway competition R360 have issued a response to the joint statement from multiple countries’ rugby unions, which has warned players of sanctions should they choose to join the new league.
While the vast majority seemingly remain opposed to the new concept, backing from certain key figures has resulted in the likes of the UK and Irish rugby unions, along with other key nations, sharing their unified stance against the potential rival.
Put in the simplest terms, the R360 model is rugby’s equivalent of what the proposed European ‘Super League’ was for football just a few years ago, with similar questions being raised around how it could jeopardise existing contests, player wellbeing and more.
Now, though, the new format – which has been largely backed and developed by former World Cup winner with England, Mike Tindall – delivered its own reply on Wednesday, 8 October.
Shared publicly to the press, the alternative tournament wrote: “It’s not always easy to embrace new opportunities, but as we’ve seen throughout history, it’s essential for any sport to grow. So many players love what R360 can do for them and the game, and we can’t wait to kick off next year.
“Player welfare is one of the key reasons for creating our global series, which will greatly reduce player load and capture the attention of a new generation of fans globally. We want to work collaboratively as part of the global rugby calendar.
“The series is designed with bespoke schedules for men’s and women’s teams and R360 will release all players for international matches, as written into their contracts. Our philosophy is clear – if players want to play for their country, they should have that opportunity. Why would the unions stand in their way?
“We look forward to submitting to the World Rugby Council for sanctioning next summer as planned.”
At present, R360 is due to hold its inagural season this time next year, with eight new male teams and four women’s sides expected to get underway from October 2026 onwards.
In addition to more lucrative contracts like those promised in the IPL (Indian Premier League) cricket, LIV Golf and the aforementioned albeit failed Super League, R360 is also set to offer a reduced playing schedule but one that would still tempt athletes away from their current teams to new franchises.
The national rugby unions of New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Ireland, England, Scotland, France and Italy have released the following statement on the proposed R360 competition ⬇️#IrishRugby
Although they have assured player care is an utmost priority, their health and fitness is one of my concerns put forward by the total eight rubgy unions who have urged current pros to stay away from the breakaway competition.
In case you haven’t seen the statement release by England, Ireland and Scotland, as well as France, Italy, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa, it begins by “urging extreme caution for players and support staff considering joining the proposed R360 competition.”
Assuring that they welcome “investment and innovation in rugby”, they feel this particular idea won’t improve the sport but could instead “fragment or weaken it.”
Having assessed the proposals supposed value/addition to the “rugby’s global ecosystem”, it seems the fear is that the outcome will be a “net negative to the game”, with little to no detail as to how it can run alongside existing fixtures, assure proper management of player welfare and more.
As for Wales, despite opting not to put their name to the open letter itself, they have stated publicly: “The Welsh Rugby Union supports this statement, and we’re considering changes we may need to make to qualification rules in Wales as part of ongoing analysis following our recent consultation process.”
The statement continues: “The R360 model, as outlined publicly, rather appears designed to generate profits and return them to a very small elite, potentially hollowing out the investment that national unions and existing leagues make in community rugby, player development, and participation pathways.”
It seems there is deep concern for how it could affect grassroots and the international rugby too, not just league and union, and have failed to full explain or help key organisations “better understand their business and operating model.”
Most notably, they sign off by adding: “Each of the national unions will therefore be advising men’s and women’s players that participation in R360 would make them ineligible for international selection.”
What do you make of the whole debate – do you like the current schedule/format as it is, or do you think there’s room for a new chapter in the rugby world?
Georgina Pellant -
11th August 2022 
