Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

Status
Not open for further replies.
JediSith said:
Let’s assume he’s a psychopath..
Click to expand...

Let's not.


I’m not saying this is Greenwood but just making a point. I no longer have an opinion on whether he did or didn’t do what he was accused of or the extent to which he did it and the extent to which the initial judgement by the public was right or wrong or underestimated or overestimated what we believed he did.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Has there ever been a more confused sentence written on here? Certainly not in ages!
 
Nogho said:
The guy was just a kid when all that happened. United should've stepped up more and helped Mason out. They should've done so in many ways, not just for him but also for his girl and his folks. They could've handled the whole thing way better. Instead, they kicked him out, and now he's in Spain playing football. I don't get how that's any better. He's still playing ball, still living with his girl, and seems to be doing okay.

I say bring him back and use him and his story as an example of how people can learn and grow from their mistakes. This club just booted the poor lad out and shipped him off to Spain. It's just ridiculous.
Click to expand...

This post got a quality control warning, maybe rightfully so. It is a good opportunity to examine this stance though.

What specifically (please do be specific) do you believe the club should and could have done?

To show I'm not playing some silly gotcha game I'll be totally transparent in why I'm asking. Regardless of the fairly unique profession, the relationship between Greenwood and the club is that of employer and employee. United (or any employer) is extremely limited in the actions they can take here.

Let's assume they were aware that abuse was taking place. It would be hard to bring any disciplinary action against an employee without what happened happening. This would be true of a retail employee let alone one with a contract the size of MG's.

The reason I say this is that the employer is extremely limited if they want to take an "or else" positioning I.e. "Engage with respect or a similar service to work on controlling these behaviours or else".

Then you move on to their pastoral efforts. This is a young man that would have been put in digs, had access to sports psychologists, incredible remuneration, I'd dare to say that had he stated he was willing to engage with a psychiatrist that the club would have gladly provided one, given huge opportunity by the employer. I could go on for a long time. He had the exact level of professional support as the MBE who devoted a significant portion of his life to feeding underprivileged children.

As far as his partner what specifically could the club have done? She is not employed by them. It would be highly inappropriate for employers to start "checking in" on the partners of their employees. There is nothing reported that mentions her approaching the club for help and them refusing.

The above is my stance so I'm just querying what you think the club should have done in specific terms that mean I should feel sympathy for this man?
 
Last edited:
strange card to get. maybe he’s got some things going on outside of football and his head isn’t in the right place.
 
Nogho said:
I'm not defending his actions or the things he appears to have done. I have two daughters myself, and I would have been furious and upset about the whole situation. But as it stands now, he's still playing football, wasn't sentenced, and appears to be living happily (though I don't know for sure) with the same girl he mistreated and behaved poorly towards.

What United did was bury their heads in the sand, hoping that someone else would sort out the problem (read: society). Nothing happened, and now they're just hoping someone else will deal with the problem (read: Getafe and/or the club that eventually buys him) and hoping to cash in on him. Then, they can just breathe out and be relieved that the problem is no longer theirs.

I think they handled the whole situation really poorly. Mason had been with the club his entire life. I assume the parents and even his girlfriend have witnessed his rise. They could have handled things differently. Instead, they just stood by and hoped for things to resolve themselves. I can't see that as a good way of handling things. Pitiful, especially when they let a different player from a different country continue playing when accused of similar things.
Click to expand...
I think they handled it poorly from the perspective they rolled back on their initial decision, they clearly were going to bring him back.

I think after that, the club has done everything fine. They listened to the concerns internally about him returning and sorted out a move for him (note no one else was interested in having him that we had to also give Getafe 20% of the future fee, if the report is believed). We'll see what happens in the future, but not sure why we owe him a career at United, he's the one the ruined it with his actions.
 
OverratedOpinion said:
This post got a quality control warning, maybe rightfully so. It is a good opportunity to examine this stance though.

What specifically (please do be specific) do you believe the club should and could have done?

To show I'm not playing some silly gotcha game I'll be totally transparent in why I'm asking. Regardless of the fairly unique profession, the relationship between Greenwood and the club is that of employer and employee. United (or any employer) is extremely limited in the actions they can take here.

Let's assume they were aware that abuse was taking place. It would be hard to bring any disciplinary action against an employee without what happened happening. This would be true of a retail employee let alone one with a contract the size of MG's.

The reason I say this is that the employer is extremely limited if they want to take an "or else" positioning I.e. "Engage with respect or a similar service to work on controlling these behaviours or else".

Then you move on to their pastoral efforts. This is a young man that would have been put in digs, had access to sports psychologists, incredible remuneration, I'd dare to say that had he stated he was willing to engage with a psychiatrist that the club would have gladly provided one, given huge opportunity by the employer. I could go on for a long time. He had the exact level of professional support as the MBE who devoted a significant portion of his life to feeding underprivileged children.

As far as his partner what specifically could the club have done? She is not employed by them. It would be highly inappropriate for employers to start "checking in" on the partners of their employees. Their is nothing reported that mentions her approaching the club for help and them refusing.

The above is my stance so I'm just querying what you think the club should have done in specific terms that mean I should feel sympathy for this man?
Click to expand...
Firstly, did you happen to catch my clarifying post a bit further down this thread?

So, I'm certainly no expert in these matters, but I can't help feeling the club might have handled things a bit better. They initially made a public statement indicating awareness of the situation. Fast forward about a year, and off he goes to Spain. There's been no real explanation of what went on during that time (from the club), and no statements clarifying the decision to send him there. I appreciate that everyone is aware of the situation (from other sources), but for a club as vast as United, ravaing about its billion-strong fanbase, one might expect a bit more finesse, especially in the media handling.

As for Greenwood and his family, I'm not privy to the details (of course) of what transpired or the kind of support offered. If he or his family declined any assistance from United, a simple acknowledgment of that would have sufficed. A public reassurance that the club has done its utmost to stand by the family, even if declined, would go a long way in maintaining transparency. But maybe that's just me.

And I must stress that I'm no expert in these matters, just expressing thoughts. I apologize if this causes offense to anyone.
 
Redlambs said:
Let's not.




:lol:

Has there ever been a more confused sentence written on here? Certainly not in ages!
Click to expand...
I know. Basically thought I’d clarify every possibility that I’ve considered before coming to my conclusion in thinking I have no idea what to think about the truth of MG situation.
 
Lash said:
I think they handled it poorly from the perspective they rolled back on their initial decision, they clearly were going to bring him back.

I think after that, the club has done everything fine. They listened to the concerns internally about him returning and sorted out a move for him (note no one else was interested in having him that we had to also give Getafe 20% of the future fee, if the report is believed). We'll see what happens in the future, but not sure why we owe him a career at United, he's the one the ruined it with his actions.
Click to expand...
United doesn't owe anyone a career, of course not. However, the decision to send him to Spain seems rather peculiar after all that has transpired. Why didn't they simply settle with him and allow him to manage his own situation instead of dispatching him there in the first instance? It all feels quite peculiar.

Perhaps, as the vast entity that United is, they should have assumed control of the situation from the outset.
 
Nogho said:
United doesn't owe anyone a career, of course not. However, the decision to send him to Spain seems rather peculiar after all that has transpired. Why didn't they simply settle with him and allow him to manage his own situation instead of dispatching him there in the first instance? It all feels quite peculiar.

Perhaps, as the vast entity that United is, they should have assumed control of the situation from the outset.
Click to expand...

He's an asset. One that was quite valuable at one point. The club can't afford to be chucking out value with the bathwater.
 
Remember the geese said:
Tiresome stuff.
Click to expand...

It is two situations where things haven't happened as he would have liked, and he has reacted in a bad way that got him in trouble.

I thought these sorts of simple comparisons was your whole jam?

Remember the geese said:
There's no need to bring context into it. The poster was making a very simple point. If there's a massive negative reaction from the public towards you, it takes mental strength to overcome that. Irrespective of context or circumstance. Why some of you can't get to grips with this is very odd.
Click to expand...

Remember the geese said:
Agree to disagree. The poster was making a very simple point and people are being contrary for the sake of it.
Click to expand...

Remember the geese said:
It is though. The point is that the public reacted angrily to Beckham and they likely would too with Greenwood. It required a lot of mental strength for Beckham to get through it, as it would for Greenwood. Very simple point.
Click to expand...

Remember the geese said:
That's because the poster was making a very simple point that people are struggling to grasp.
Click to expand...
 
Nogho said:
United doesn't owe anyone a career, of course not. However, the decision to send him to Spain seems rather peculiar after all that has transpired. Why didn't they simply settle with him and allow him to manage his own situation instead of dispatching him there in the first instance? It all feels quite peculiar.

Perhaps, as the vast entity that United is, they should have assumed control of the situation from the outset.
Click to expand...
We didn't dispatch him at the first instance, no one in the Prem would touch him with a 10ft barge pole. We had no relationship with Getafe until this, I doubt it was his first choice, it was more likely his only option.

The framing of this is as though we banished him when he had a wealth of options here or top teams after him. We weren't an option and there's no suggestion any one in the prem was. We've found him a team in a top European league and also paying his massive wage, he's hardly hard done by.
 
He didn't get a red card for counting to four on his fingers, it was surely for the upwards gesture afterwards. Almost resembled bras d'honneur but with only one arm
 
Remember the geese said:
I was simply backing up another poster's point. Ridiculously, but unsurprisingly, people jumped on him. I didn't resort to a childish dig to prove my point, unlike the post I quoted.
Click to expand...

When attempted rape is compared to getting a red card: simple point, anyone reacting to the comparison is being ridicilous and contrary for the sake of it.

When getting a red card is compared to attempted rape: tiresome, childish.
 
Tbf he did get fouled once or twice in that run and ref did nothing. A red card for dissent is incredibly harsh.

Read somewhere that getafe have the worst losing record when this ref is in their games
 
NotThatSoph said:
The public backlash from getting a red card was compared to the public backlash from what we all heard on the tape. It's the same thing as what you now consider childish and tiresome.
Click to expand...
Public backlash is public backlash. It's difficult to overcome regardless of the circumstance that surrounds it. A very simple point that I cannot believe some are struggling to comprehend.
 
ArjenIsM3 said:
Since when is dissent a straight red? :lol:
Click to expand...
I didn't mean it should be a straight red. I just described what happened. The fact it was a red is ridiculous to be honest. We don't know what he told him though.
 
Remember the geese said:
Public backlash is public backlash. It's difficult to overcome regardless of the circumstance that surrounds it. A very simple point that I cannot believe some are struggling to comprehend.
Click to expand...

You're really trying to top the Bible guy for most ridicilous statement in this thread?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.