This is such a reductive comment. Totally unhelpful and simplistic.
Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player
- Thread starter keithsingleton
- Start date
- Status
This is such a reductive comment. Totally unhelpful and simplistic.
Perhaps then you can answer my genuine question?
"I can't answer your question so I will call your question stupid and run"
If attempted rape was punished more consistently, society would collapse.
Interesting take.
It's actually OK In England too as long as they don't play for Man United, we have/had in the EPL Cat abusers, Accused Rapists, Gangbangers even killers but nobody bats an eyelid.
Partly because our own fans get caught up in the hyperbole that rival fans and the ABU media create so we just have a ridiculously higher moral standard than everyone else.
In this case we have a young lad that has reconciled with the girl and her family and possibly not even done the things to the level that we assume but we have to hang him to dry and also lose out on the money and talent whilst the other clubs and fans would take him in a second and not many people would care.
A fine for what?
That's not a rhetorical device. It's a serious question. If he's an innocent person why are you fining him at all?
If a fine is in play, so is a straight sacking, or plan to move him on. It prompts the question:
Is a fine acceptable punishment for threatening your partner with rape when you are refused sex?
My answer is no.
What's yours?
If what is okay in Spain? Do you think threatening people with rape is permissible under Spanish law?
Greenwood's case collapsing is the reason he's allowed to play in Spain, but it's absolutely no proof of innocence.
There has been plenty of criticism of Getafe's conduct, and their president has been branded a hypocrite for signing him whilst criticising Rubiales.
Haha. If reading between the lines and twisting others words had a prize....
That’s literally what you said.
No one thinks it’s okay in Spain. I’d prefer he never plays football again.
The vast majority of intimate partner violence takes place behind closed doors. I worked in the sector for years helping survivors to apply for Non-Moleststion orders. I drafted literally thousands of witness statements/read thousands or tens of thousands of abusive incidents. The vast majority would not be possible to prosecute due to time passing and lack of evidence due to the behaviour taking place in private (and other factors)
The fact the CPS dropped the case is just entirely irrelevant. This would happen in the vast majority of IPV cases where the complainant decides they don't want to support the investigation.
The point was he is playing professional football in Spain and generally it's acceptable. Yes, there are some criticism. This is normal as everyone have their own view and opinion on the matter.
It shouldn't be any different whether he is playing in Spain or England.
"The point" made by who?
It certainly wasn't the point of the post you first quoted.
Hmm... He is in fact playing professional football in Spain. So, I guess there are people/law are okay with that.
Away from United is the best we can hope for. Where that isn't of much consequence or at least largely uncontrollable.
I genuinely have no idea what you are suggesting or trying to say. I can not possibly get down to your level.
It’s up for debate. People are suggesting punishment of some sorts, what’s your take?
We all know he is not found guilty under legal system, and the victim is very happy with that, so do you want to accept his innocence? Seems not, so what do you want for him?
Permanent ban from football? But he has been literally frozen out from playing football for 18 months. Some one suggest he shouldn’t be paid during these periods, which makes some sense. So why are you so against it?
Well it’s clear his partner/victim doesn’t want him to be punished at all. So are we going against the wish of victim regardless in order to uphold our own moral values, which has nothing good to do with her?
If so, what is you suggestion? Not to play for Man Utd ever again, but it’s fine for him to play anywhere else then? That seems strange take as it’s all about moral values afterall, but couldn’t care less if it’s nothing to do with United of course.
"The point" I was asking the genuine question why it's acceptable to play professional football in Spain but not in UK?
Wow...stay at your high level then. Thanks for responding.
Right, I think you need something painfully simple explaining.
I don’t want Greenwood to ever have the honour of playing professionally again.
I don’t want him anywhere near Man United. I support Man United.
Ideally he wouldn’t play in Spain but I can’t literally impact every single club in the world to act correctly.
Here is a similar point to the one you’re making.
Wolves have been impacted massively by VAR this year - often unfairly.
Why do Wolves not protest when Feyenoord get a bad call made against them last week?
This bit shows you don't really know what you're talking about as he was never found not guilty and then you immediately conflated being not guilty, with innocence.
The last paragraph isn't a gotcha. In any other scenario if someone's accused of something, but not ultimately proven, you would not want to take the risk with that person. If someone else is willing to risk it, by all means, but if they asked your opinion you'd tell them not to.
I think you are going abit ahead got it all mixed up, I never implied not guilty equals innocence. I am just saying not found guilty under legal system is a fact and not up for debate there, but whether he is accepted as innocence is up for debate. Noted that I have put this up as a question rather a statement or conclusion.
And the rest, I am simply ask for peoples take in it. Trying not to go overboard and one-sided with personal morals, but instead also looking for what the victim in this case is genuinely asking for there.
Last edited:
The only thing I would wonder about was whether Mason and ******* would want to come back to Manchester/Bradford? They're both very young, have a six month old daughter, and, I believe Mason, at least, is looking for a property in Madrid.
*******, as far as I'm aware, still lives in UK, but not totally sure, but if they want to stay together, never certain with both being so young, they probably couldn't live in a better place for them.
I suppose it comes down to them wanting to bring their daughter up in Spain, or nearer family back in UK.
Mason looks like he's getting back to some sort of form, and if he keeps that up, then several bigger clubs could be sniffing around.
*******, as far as I'm aware, still lives in UK, but not totally sure, but if they want to stay together, never certain with both being so young, they probably couldn't live in a better place for them.
I suppose it comes down to them wanting to bring their daughter up in Spain, or nearer family back in UK.
Mason looks like he's getting back to some sort of form, and if he keeps that up, then several bigger clubs could be sniffing around.
Amazing how people choose to ignore this as he is good at football or something.
Except he was never found not guilty, it never went to court. So I think you're not even framing the debate properly.
Ok, well you got mine there. Unless you know the victim, it's pretty futile to try and understand what she's thinking/want.
No twisting, no reading between the lines. That's the exact type of "transgressions" forgiveness were asked for when you brought up societal collapse.
The powers that be at the club itself were happy to bring him back, to be fair. Is it that amazing that fans on a forum were/are okay with it? For me, I wanted him to stay at the club but be put through rehab and on his own developmental pathway until psychological practitioners were satisfied he'd shown a degree of contrition (not that that would be known publicly). Still, the detachment between fans and clubs/mega corporations and players/celebrities, the victim's position, the club and ten Hag gearing up for his return etc. paint a reasonable enough picture to help understand why posters on a football forum hold the opinion they do wrt bringing Greenwood back.
I’m starting to lean towards letting him back. I mean his girlfriend is still with him and they have a daughter. He is young and stupid in those clips behaving like a little shit. If he has made inroads into stopping this behaviour such as couples counselling or whatever and his girlfriend is happy to stay with him and feels her child is safe around him. People can mature and change for the better, especially young people
only god can judge greenwood. amazing how many egos we have on here who see themselves as god.
Hey we’re not listening to you because we’re sick of listening to experts. How dare you bring years of experience to the argument it’s not important. What’s important is that we get one over on the media as Rachel Riley and can say haha told you so.
I mean your answer is literally in post 8256 above by @OverratedOpinion
Last edited:
this?
"Nah, grown men who beat women and threaten to rape them can stay away from the club for life cheers.
He blew his shot to play for his childhood club by being a nasty, nasty little scrote and can go and "learn his lessons" elsewhere. "
That has nothing to do with it. Case was fresh and, if the CPS would have found compelling evidence of penal offences, Greenwood would have been incarcerated immediately, no matter the cooperation from the victim.
These discussions are pointleas anyway as nobody knows what the actual feck happened.
I've heard worse recordings that that, went to court and the case unfolded the other way around so that's why I'm restraining from definitely putting my words in Mason being guilty.
The club moved him on so they plainly weren't happy to keep him. And if they were so what? They feck up most things so why not this as well?
And rehab? Are you having a laugh. He doesn't even accept he did anything wrong.
The simple fact is that under such circumstances, keeping him in any way is condoning domestic violence.
Just because most DV perpertrators get away with it doesn't make Greenwood's behaviour any less despicable.
Or more so by the same principle.
False equivalences are really dangerous in both directions
I understand you (and a few posters here who want Greenwood gone) are a staff (so I should be more respectful), but unfortunately I couldn't get this logic.
Just because player A does something considered bad in the society and Club B keeps him shouldn't necessarily mean condoning the bad thing right? Otherwise every single club in the Premier League condones cheating on your couple.
Maguire beat the Greek police up and we kept him (yes, I know Maguire has be convicted and served his "suspended sentence", that's the "difference"), would you say we condone physical violence as well?
I take my cues from the one, true god, Rachel Riley.
I'd love to be banned from my job while also still being paid.
- Status