Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sandikan said:
If there is any evidence to the contrary of him being an absolute wrongun, why wouldn't either the club, or the alleged victim bring it to the media?
Click to expand...

Because it’s not that simple? The particulars of this situation could compromise and put both the victim and Greenwood in a vulnerable position? Greenwood did say that he didn’t commit the offences he was accused of, but that he’s made mistakes in his relationship - if you look for it you can find testimony of people in random forums prior to this situation saying they had a toxic/volatile relationship. All that veers the conversation into speculation territory though.

Would it even be possible for the club to disclose said particulars legally? The victim has a right for lifelong anonymity
 
Raoul said:
Not sure if I agree with the latter bit, as its a narrative that appears to rob his partner of her agency to make her own choices by needlessly cramming a victimhood stereotype onto her when none of us actually know her motivation. For all we know, they could legitimately be in love with the intention of starting a family and becoming life partners, which appears to be playing out given that she appears all in on their long term relationship.
Click to expand...
While I disagree with the point you're arguing against, the same can be leveled with people saying everything is hunkey dorey with them now.

I think the right decision has been come to in the end, he should rebuild away from our club and has a lot of rebuilding to do internally and externally. I think everyone has to realise there are risks in every scenario, he could come back and be the best dad, husband professional he's ever been - but he could equally make the same mistakes again in the future. United will have to take that risk and the consequences of that decision should they make it, positives and negatives.
 
Last edited:
Solius said:
Poor widdle mason. Nobody has a clue what went on :( just so baffling how this could happen to such an innocent nice person.
Click to expand...
But is there any such thing as, like, objective truth dude? *Takes gigantic toke* What's to say I'm not actually a character in a ferret's fever dream? Sure we have some things to go on but because we don't know absolutely every single fact about the case (what he had for brekkie on the day of the alleged assault(s), whether she was wearing studded or hooped earrings etc) we obviously CAN'T draw any conclusions, however preliminary.

Nobody can ever REALLY KNOW anything, ever. And this is absolutely not a way of self-justifying.
 
Lash said:
While I agree with the point you're arguing against, the same can be leveled with people saying everything is hunkey dorey with them now.

I think the right decision has been come to in the end, he should rebuild away from our club and has a lot of rebuilding to do internally and externally. I think everyone has to realise there are risks in every scenario, he could come back and be the best dad, husband professional he's ever been - but he could equally make the same mistakes again in the future. United will have to take that risk and the consequences of that decision should they make it, positives and negatives.
Click to expand...

I hope he goes on to be a great Dad and great husband and all of this will one day be one of those bad things people have done in the past but the were able to overcome. I hope he has a brilliant career and fulfils his potential and does great things.
Im also with you in thinking the right decision has been made.
 
maniak said:
That's fair, but I don't see why assuming everything was done in a friendly way and she's genuinely happy is more valid than assuming the was pressured and is suffering from what many other abuse victims suffer when they remain with their abusive partners.

Both are guesses, I'm just wondering what made you pick one over the other. Optimism? Projecting because you hope they have a happy ending? I'm curious.
Click to expand...

I’m not presuming either, just going by the evidence of seing them together, which is more suggestive of the optimistic view than not. When people see a happy family out and about it’s normal to think it’s out of inspiration rather than coercion.
 
Raoul said:
I’m not presuming either, just going by the evidence of seing them together, which is more suggestive of the optimistic view than not. When people see a happy family out and about it’s normal to think it’s out of inspiration rather than coercion.
Click to expand...
But then again most happy families don't have audio and images in the public domain, as well as initial accusations from the alleged victim, that imply that one half was violent, abusive and coercive to be fair. Comparing them to most happy families is a little disingenuous.
 
moses said:
I think people's opinions are connected to the vile media that has never been explained. That's logical right?

If that media existed regarding you, would you not explain it if you could?
Click to expand...
Logical and yes, I personally would want to explain my innocence. I'm assuming there is some reason why he refuses to but given the status of the criminal case, the statement of the club, and the support of the accuser and her family I still see no reason to jump to conclusions that he is for sure an abuser/rapist.

Given that people have already made up their minds, are we confident a public explanation of what happened that exonerates him would be believed? I seriously doubt it.
Solius said:
He’s not been falsely accused.

I’ll caveat that with just my opinion of course because as we all know when charges are dropped it’s because someone is totally and utterly innocent and were just really unfortunate.
Click to expand...
Call it wrongfully accused, believed to be innocent, or whatever.

I care less about the dropped charges and more about the club putting its reputation on the line to back his claims of innocence and her family publicly supporting him. Even with this, I still can't say for certain he's not a rapist/abuser just like I can't say for certain he is.

The only thing I can say for certain is that the evidence against him looked incriminating, however, he was cleared of charges, the club backed his innocence, and the victim and her family are supporting him. Anything else is just conjecture.
 
Last edited:
Pickle85 said:
But then again most happy families don't have audio and images in the public domain, as well as initial accusations from the alleged victim, that imply that one half was violent, abusive and coercive to be fair. Comparing them to most happy families is a little disingenuous.
Click to expand...

I actually think it’s disingenuous to tell someone who portrays themself as happy that they’re not actually happy - all because simply believing them at face value doesn’t conform to one’s political agenda about the issue.
 
Raoul said:
I’m not presuming either, just going by the evidence of seing them together, which is more suggestive of the optimistic view than not. When people see a happy family out and about it’s normal to think it’s out of inspiration rather than coercion.
Click to expand...
I hope you're right but I'm not so sure, it's very common to see celebrities who are having issues with their partners looking happy for the cameras.
 
Raoul said:
I actually think it’s disingenuous to tell someone who portrays themself as happy that they’re not actually happy - all because simply believing them at face value doesn’t conform to one’s political agenda about the issue.
Click to expand...
Nail on the head.
 
Raoul said:
Not sure if I agree with the latter bit, as its a narrative that appears to rob his partner of her agency to make her own choices by needlessly cramming a victimhood stereotype onto her when none of us actually know her motivation. For all we know, they could legitimately be in love with the intention of starting a family and becoming life partners, which appears to be playing out given that she appears all in on their long term relationship.
Click to expand...

He said victims of abuse often stay with their partner, which is an objective statement backed up by statistics. So the bolded bit you wrote is cowardly bs
 
Cascarino said:
He said victims of abuse often stay with their partner, which is an objective statement backed up by statistics. So the bolded bit you wrote is cowardly bs
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with the specific nature of this particular instance. If you're not willing to believe her then that's your choice.
 
Sandikan said:
If there is any evidence to the contrary of him being an absolute wrongun, why wouldn't either the club, or the alleged victim bring it to the media?
Bearing in mind that both of their ideal outcomes would be to stay playing at United, in their home envrionment?

Instead of this we've had nothing from the family and a strange statement from United saying, ohhh we believe him from what we've seen but we're still exiling him.
Click to expand...

Indeed, if there was a rational explanation for the audio clip that was shared on social media (which I doubt) you'd think they'd have disclosed it. But to play devil's advocate you'd imagine the club might be hesitant to discuss such matters publicly depending on what the explanation potentially was.
 
Not trying to defend Greenwood, but it makes me happy that she is there cheering him on. I hope they’re happy together. I hope Greenwood has learned his lesson from all of this and they have worked things out.

Being a Manchester United player at that young age probably had an immense impact on Greenwood. Pressure, stress and the fame, this is all speculation but perhaps that got to him and made him uncharacteristically aggressive and entitled. Not excusable, of course, but if that’s the reason for his behaviour he can definitely work on his flaws and improve as a person. It would be a whole different story if it was say a personality disorder and lack of empathy. I believe everyone is capable to be violent but we have different lines you have to cross to get to that point. You see a lot of young footballers acting out because it’s simply too much to handle.

I see this as a case of a young man not controlling his emotions and letting it getting the best of him, causing his partner great harm. But I also see this as a young man getting his act together and learning from his mistakes, and I believe Harriet sees it that way as well. Or I hope so, rather.
 
MackRobinson said:
Given that people have already made up their minds, are we confident a public explanation of what happened that exonerates him would be believed? I seriously doubt it.

Call it wrongfully accused, believed to be innocent, or whatever.
Click to expand...

I think it depends on what it is.
 
Cassidy said:
Very much doubt that
Click to expand...

I can only speak for myself it would totally depend on what info I was given. The data at hand is grim so I'm not sure what it would take. I also don't want to speculate what it could take. But in thd absence I'm left to make my judgement on the data to hand. And while I don't think he should be locked up without a defence, I'm perfectly happy not to have him in my personal sphere for now.
 
moses said:
I can only speak for myself it would totally depend on what info I was given. The data at hand is grim so I'm not sure what it would take. I also don't want to speculate what it could take. But in thd absence I'm left to make my judgement on the data to hand. And while I don't think he should be locked up without a defence, I'm perfectly happy not to have him in my personal sphere for now.
Click to expand...
I don’t know why you feel you have to make a judgment at all.
 
I can see why there are two very different views on this and plenty in between.

In terms of the case and it’s collapse I think it’s quite obvious now that it did so for two reasons;

1) Withdrawal of key witnesses - Specifically the victim.

2) New evidence coming to light that undermined the case.

Now the CPS can prosecute without a victim if they so wish. It’s not essential. The evidence must be available though, the allegations serious and it must be in the public interest to continue (every domestic case will hit this element). In this case we have all seen some of the evidence which appears quite damning so it begs the question why didn’t they continue.

Reading between the lines, and looking at what United mentioned in their statement, I suspect the new evidence coming to light refers to the recordings and is probably quite significant to the case. What this is exactly we will likely never know but according to United what was released was part of a longer recording and the rest helped them conclude Greenwood did not do what he was accused of.

Again, people will make their own mind up and given how emotive the subject is that’s fully understandable. It’s a tough subject to deal with and will have impacted people on this forum throughout their personal lives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moses
OrcaFat said:
I don’t know why you feel you have to make a judgment at all.
Click to expand...

It's not proactive. It's a human reflex. We do all the time. On everything we encounter. It's the nature of the human. It would be quite unusual to see the media in question and not make some judgement. It's not judgement in any grand biblical sense. Just, I don't or do like that. Or that's OK or that isn't. Or I'm not comfortable with that. People make a variety of judgments with identical data.
 
Pickle85 said:
But then again most happy families don't have audio and images in the public domain, as well as initial accusations from the alleged victim, that imply that one half was violent, abusive and coercive to be fair. Comparing them to most happy families is a little disingenuous.
Click to expand...

Cant they be happy now?
 
moses said:
I think it depends on what it is.
Click to expand...
I can't think of anything short of full audio showing the snippet was out of context, hard evidence he didn't purposely cause the injuries, and his girlfriend admitting she set him up that would convince those who think he's an abuser/rapist.

Even if that extremely hypothetical evidence exists, I think we can admit the chances of him humiliating the mother of his child like that on national television are low.
 
MackRobinson said:
I can't think of anything short of full audio showing the snippet was out of context, hard evidence he didn't purposely cause the injuries, and his girlfriend admitting she set him up that would convince those who think he's an abuser/rapist.

Even if extremely hypothetical evidence exists, I think we can admit the chances of him humiliating the mother of his child like that on national television are low.
Click to expand...

It is what it is. I don't want or expect him to humiliate anyone. He owes me nothing and I owe him nothing. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, I'm just explaining my take.
 
moses said:
It's not proactive. It's a human reflex. We do all the time. On everything we encounter. It's the nature of the human. It would be quite unusual to see the media in question and not make some judgement. It's not judgement in any grand biblical sense. Just, I don't or do like that. Or that's OK or that isn't. Or I'm not comfortable with that. People make a variety of judgments with identical data.
Click to expand...
It's not though you just think it is, you already know I'm not like that (that I'd rather wait to form an informed opinion) and there are plenty others who aren't as reactive too. It's a sliding scale where people choose where they are based on the merits of each evaluation but you are consistently positioned right at the end.

You are very dogmatic, which is fine, lots of people are like that but it would be great if you could admit it and keep it in mind when talking (or sniping) to people about sitting on the fence and choosing sides. That goes for many others too, not just you specifically... If I'm off the mark then correct me and make it make sense.
 
Is there a chance he plays for Manchester United ever again? I watched True Geordie's Kick Off and they're all almost convinced that's going to happen(reintroduction to the squad) and Man United is just delaying that by sending him on loan to regain his form.

Based on what I've heard here and on reddit, no chance. But who knows, everything's possible, I guess...
 
Raoul said:
That has nothing to do with the specific nature of this particular instance. If you're not willing to believe her then that's your choice.
Click to expand...

Finally someone calling out the BS. All the opposite narratives to what you can see or hear with the physical eye and ears is just on you to suit your narratives.

Nothing else.
 
So is Mason set for his debut after the international break? At home against Osasuna, might be a nice spot for him to make a substitute appearance. I’m certain the Getafe supporters will give him a warm welcome.
 
TheReligion said:
I can see why there are two very different views on this and plenty in between.

In terms of the case and it’s collapse I think it’s quite obvious now that it did so for two reasons;

1) Withdrawal of key witnesses - Specifically the victim.

2) New evidence coming to light that undermined the case.

Now the CPS can prosecute without a victim if they so wish. It’s not essential. The evidence must be available though, the allegations serious and it must be in the public interest to continue (every domestic case will hit this element). In this case we have all seen some of the evidence which appears quite damning so it begs the question why didn’t they continue.

Reading between the lines, and looking at what United mentioned in their statement, I suspect the new evidence coming to light refers to the recordings and is probably quite significant to the case. What this is exactly we will likely never know but according to United what was released was part of a longer recording and the rest helped them conclude Greenwood did not do what he was accused of.

Again, people will make their own mind up and given how emotive the subject is that’s fully understandable. It’s a tough subject to deal with and will have impacted people on this forum throughout their personal lives.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, agree with this
 
afrocentricity said:
It's not though you just think it is, you already know I'm not like that (that I'd rather wait to form an informed opinion) and there are plenty others who aren't as reactive too. It's a sliding scale where people choose where they are based on the merits of each evaluation but you are consistently positioned right at the end.

You are very dogmatic, which is fine, lots of people are like that but it would be great if you could admit it and keep it in mind when talking (or sniping) to people about sitting on the fence and choosing sides. That goes for many others too, not just you specifically... If I'm off the mark then correct me and make it make sense.
Click to expand...


It is a reflex. It's part of the human genius. We are always absorbing and processing information. That's the level of judgement I'm taking about. Not any more. And yes a better judgement can be always made with more information. I live in a house full of books.

What am I right at the end of?

With Greenwood I was just honestly reacting to data at hand. Which is fine. You wanted more data and insisted everyone else should wait too.

Yes I can appear dogmatic because of of consistency but in your case you don't sit on the fence as much as shut down conversation. It's fine to sit on the fence but it's not ok insist everyone else does too.

II fully respect people not choosing sides, most things don't interest me, my issue is you not permitting others to decide what they think.
 
TheReligion said:
I can see why there are two very different views on this and plenty in between.

In terms of the case and it’s collapse I think it’s quite obvious now that it did so for two reasons;

1) Withdrawal of key witnesses - Specifically the victim.

2) New evidence coming to light that undermined the case.

Now the CPS can prosecute without a victim if they so wish. It’s not essential. The evidence must be available though, the allegations serious and it must be in the public interest to continue (every domestic case will hit this element). In this case we have all seen some of the evidence which appears quite damning so it begs the question why didn’t they continue.

Reading between the lines, and looking at what United mentioned in their statement, I suspect the new evidence coming to light refers to the recordings and is probably quite significant to the case. What this is exactly we will likely never know but according to United what was released was part of a longer recording and the rest helped them conclude Greenwood did not do what he was accused of.

Again, people will make their own mind up and given how emotive the subject is that’s fully understandable. It’s a tough subject to deal with and will have impacted people on this forum throughout their personal lives.
Click to expand...

with regards the rest of the recording altering the clubs perspective on masons guilt, the only thing I can think of is that (apologies if this is a bit much) she audibly has a good time, maybe even expresses that she enjoyed the encounter. However, in releasing that, I’m pretty sure she would incriminate herself for wasting police time/deliberately misleading an investigation, which I doubt Greenwood wants to do to the mother of his child. I cant see any other feasible explanation.
 
moses said:
It is a reflex. It's part of the human genius. We are always absorbing and processing information. That's the level of judgement I'm taking about. Not any more. And yes a better judgement can be always made with more information. I live in a house full of books.

What am I right at the end of?

With Greenwood I was just honestly reacting to data at hand. Which is fine. You wanted more data and insisted everyone else should wait too.

Yes I can appear dogmatic because of of consistency but in your case you don't sit on the fence as much as shut down conversation. It's fine to sit on the fence but it's not ok insist everyone else does too.

II fully respect people not choosing sides, most things don't interest me, my issue is you not permitting others to decide what they think.
Click to expand...
Mate, I hold no sway over anyone here and I don't recall telling anyone what to think, not even close.... Me merely stating that I'd like to "wait and see" was enough to piss people off to the extent they try to meme me........... or shut me down, as you put it.

I would suggest those people stop worrying about what I think. It really doesn't matter...
 
FriedClams said:
with regards the rest of the recording altering the clubs perspective on masons guilt, the only thing I can think of is that (apologies if this is a bit much) she audibly has a good time, maybe even expresses that she enjoyed the encounter. However, in releasing that, I’m pretty sure she would incriminate herself for wasting police time/deliberately misleading an investigation, which I doubt Greenwood wants to do to the mother of his child. I cant see any other feasible explanation.
Click to expand...

There’s a few possibilities really in terms of the recordings.

Probably best not to get in to it though to be honest.

Again I’m just putting these things together based on the statements from the CPS and United.
 
Cascarino said:
He said victims of abuse often stay with their partner, which is an objective statement backed up by statistics. So the bolded bit you wrote is cowardly bs
Click to expand...
Yeah a completely objective statement designed to cast doubt on her decision to stay with and marry him and force a further narrative of abuse onto the situation that is completely speculative.
 
afrocentricity said:
Mate, I hold no sway over anyone here and I don't recall telling anyone what to think, not even close.... Me merely stating that I'd like to "wait and see" was enough to piss people off to the extent they try to meme me........... or shut me down, as you put it.

I would suggest those people stop worrying about what I think. It really doesn't matter...
Click to expand...


I think those folk weren't pushing back on the wait and see message because that's pretty much always true. New info can come to long established truths.

And I don't think they were worrying, and I doubt one poster has any genuinely bad will towards you. You seem like a top human.

I think they might have thought you were discounting their valid opinions or found your strongly held view that people should avoid strongly held views kind of funny. And while you are right, it's just funny to push passivity and objectivity so 'aggressively'. You're not aggressive at all, it's just to emphasise a point.

If any of us has any power I hope we'd be more aligned to your way, but for the sake of a discussion forum, some of us need to make the odd declaration.
 
Raoul said:
I’m not presuming either, just going by the evidence of seing them together, which is more suggestive of the optimistic view than not. When people see a happy family out and about it’s normal to think it’s out of inspiration rather than coercion.
Click to expand...
I’m more inclined with your line of thinking. To come to a more positive conclusion, from what started with horrific and appalling audio/photos takes belief, thinking and analysis from things we can read, see and extrapolate.

Belief in what we have been told from the CPS and club.

Analysis of the above combined with the alleged victim and her family / friends behaviour towards Greenwood and / or lack of concern that the two are back together.

Thinking negatively about the ending takes a whole lot of unsubstantiated assumptions. Assumptions that the father is in it for the money or “not a very nice person”. We actually know he’s a pretty wealthy person.
Assumption that Greenwood somehow coerced the alleged victim to get back with him or she is with him as a helpless victim. But the fact that the victim comes from a stable background with a strong social group makes the possibility a huge assumption considering the lack of concern from her family and peers. And also it stereotypes her as an abuse victim unable to leave. A huge assumption based on one case. Would have substance if there was a pattern.
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
I actually think it’s disingenuous to tell someone who portrays themself as happy that they’re not actually happy - all because simply believing them at face value doesn’t conform to one’s political agenda about the issue.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone's getting in touch with them to say it, and how is it a political agenda?
 
moses said:
I think those folk weren't pushing back on the wait and see message because that's pretty much always true. New info can come to long established truths.

And I don't think they were worrying, and I doubt one poster has any genuinely bad will towards you. You seem like a top human.

I think they might have thought you were discounting their valid opinions or found your strongly held view that people should avoid strongly held views (without all the facts) kind of funny. And while you are right, it's just funny to push passivity and objectivity so 'aggressively'. You're not aggressive at all, it's just to emphasise a point.

If any of us has any power I hope we'd be more aligned to your way, but for the sake of a discussion forum, some of us need to make the odd declaration.
Click to expand...
Fair enough mate, fair enough. I'll admit it is a pretty strongly held view! Oh well.... :nervous:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.