Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

Status
Not open for further replies.
AngeloHenriquez said:
I don't pretend he did nothing, I'm saying we don't have all the facts, that is a fact. Anything beyond half the story and speculating or drawing conclusions is close minded, I'll admit based on the evidence I sit similarly with you but I am able to separate the little evidence we have on the man and the footballer, that's all, it's not personal for me and as stated previously I will accept the decision the club make as they have more information on the topic than I.
Click to expand...

We have plenty of facts. Just because the facts alone aren't enough for a prosecution, due to the complainant withdrew cooperation, doesn't mean Greenwood isn't an utter flog who shouldn't be within a million miles of the club. He makes Giggs seem angelic in comparison (also a massive flog).

I also don't give a flying feck what the club think. They have cocked most things up recently so why not this as well?
 
AngeloHenriquez said:
For what it's worth, I wouldn't report you nor do I think you can be accused of libel, I simply think it's biased view and you are looking to downplay achievements on the field because of the off field issues, which is completely your right to do so, I just prefer to be measured, of what I know of the person I think it's despicable but the players is uniquely talented.

In response also to your earlier comment on trusting the club, I can only hope that SJR and his team are more experienced/ qualified than the Glazers who clearly on focus on value/ money and they will make a more informed decision.
Click to expand...

I'm not downplaying his football as it is utterly irrelevant. I am also being totally measured. Those ignoring and/or downplaying his behaviour because he kicks a ball well are not.
 
golden_blunder said:
Unfair, mods are voluntary and are as entitled to an opinion as anyone else.
Click to expand...

Yep and my fault. I wrongly thought you had to demonstrate a level of balance and objectivity in how you voiced it, and the standard bearer for the forum even if in a voluntary capacity.

There is a difference between having an opinion to using your position in how you voice it. It still comes with a level of responsibility irrespective of your personal view or opinion (or a least that is what I thought)?
 
Litch said:
Yep and my fault. I wrongly thought you had to demonstrate a level of balance and subjectivity in how you voiced it, and the standard bearer for the forum even if in a voluntary capacity.

There is a difference between having an opinion to using your position in how you voice it. It still comes with a level of responsibility irrespective of your view.
Click to expand...

images
 
Genuine thought - is this the worst (football-related) thread in Caf history?

To say it is tough reading is an understatement really.
 
JB08 said:
Genuine thought - is this the worst (football-related) thread in Caf history?

To say it is tough reading is an understatement really.
Click to expand...

Possibly.

But at least it shines a light on just how many people genuinely don't give a flying feck about major issues and who is affected as long as their team can occasionally score a goal.
 
Litch said:
Yep and my fault. I wrongly thought you had to demonstrate a level of balance and objectivity in how you voiced it, and the standard bearer for the forum even if in a voluntary capacity.

There is a difference between having an opinion to using your position in how you voice it. It still comes with a level of responsibility irrespective of your personal view or opinion (or a least that is what I thought)?
Click to expand...
How is he using his position (you’re talking about @Wibble here)? He can voice his opinion, and off course it’s going to be strong as he strongly believes in his morals and ethics. He has already said that he will not deal with reports that are about his posts. And we don’t hide from calling each other out. @Solius and @SilentWitness will testify that I’m a grumpy fecker behind the scenes constantly querying if we took the right steps. (Not just them btw, they are just examples). We constantly question each other.
 
I thought the red card he received last night was incredibly harsh and should have been a yellow at worst. Apparently Getafe have a lower win rate under that referee than any other in the league so I wonder if there is a bit of history there. Where the other two red cards justified?

I think the move to Getafe was a stroke of genius and has allowed him to focus on his football, something which I think would have been a struggle in England. I'm impressed by how quickly he has got up to speed given his prolonged absence at a critical time of his career. With the right support around him that he has potential to compete and perform for some of the best clubs in Europe and I wouldn't be surprised to see one of the Italian or Spanish giants attempt to poach him this summer.

When it comes to what he was accused off, it's a very emotively charged subject and one which I feel needs to be judged rationally in a way which accounts for both what is and isn't in the public domain. I think it's quite reckless to jump to conclusions or make presumptions of innocence or guilt based on the limited information available to the public.

For the foreseeable I think it's in Masons and his families best interests to continue his footballing career abroad where there are less off field distractions and he can focus on his football. I'll continue to observe his progress and wish him the best moving forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: golden_blunder
SilentWitness said:
They're deleted or given warnings when we pick up on it or they're reported. As always, we rely on members of the forum to use the report function.
Click to expand...

That and libellous comments are not occurring generally. Disagreeing with Greenwood apologists isn't liabellous.
 
rimaldo said:
agreed. can’t believe that hardly any of the mods openly endorse beating up and raping a partner. it’s like what’s the point of having all that power if you’re not going to even bother abusing it?
Click to expand...

This kind of sarcastic straw man nonsense should be deleted as far as I'm concerned (Greenwood was never even accused of rape and certainly not convicted of it) - that it then gets a 'Like' is exactly the reason many are complaining
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
Did he say that? (in what language?)

I just saw the 1-2-3-4 counting gesture (for the fouls on him) and throwing his arms up a bit. Not googled/been on social media to check details
Click to expand...

Apparently that is exactly what he said - according to a local report someone posted earlier. If he didn't why was he sent off?

And the language is a bit irrelevant as I'm fairly sure a Spanish ref would know the phrase in multiple languages.
 
Rood said:
This kind of sarcastic straw man nonsense should be deleted as far as I'm concerned (Greenwood was never even accused of rape and certainly not convicted of it) - that it then gets a 'Like' is exactly the reason many are complaining
Click to expand...

It isn't strawman. It is pure sarcasm.
 
Wibble said:
It isn't strawman. It is pure sarcasm.
Click to expand...

Well the suggestion that anyone at all would endorse those things is the strawman.

I'd suggest making jokes about rape is not a good look anyway but I see it's been edited so fair enough.
 
Rood said:
This kind of sarcastic straw man nonsense should be deleted as far as I'm concerned (Greenwood was never even accused of rape and certainly not convicted of it) - that it then gets a 'Like' is exactly the reason many are complaining
Click to expand...

Off topic of your point, you've said this before, but was he not charged with "one count of attempted rape, one count of controlling and coercive behaviour and one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm"?

On topic, I've said before and my opinion hasn't changed, I don't think likes should be given out in this thread or about this subject.
 
Wibble said:
Apparently that is exactly what he said - according to a local report someone posted earlier. If he didn't why was he sent off?

And the language is a bit irrelevant as I'm fairly sure a Spanish ref would know the phrase in multiple languages.
Click to expand...

There is disagreement over what he said - the ref report says 'feck You' (still harsh red but understandable) but his manager claims it was 'feck Sake' or something along those lines, probably not worth appealing anyway
 
Redlambs said:
Off topic of your point, you've said this before, but was he not charged with "one count of attempted rape, one count of controlling and coercive behaviour and one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm"?

On topic, I've said before and my opinion hasn't changed, I don't think likes should be given out in this thread or about this subject.
Click to expand...
That’s what I thought too
 
Redlambs said:
Off topic of your point, you've said this before, but was he not charged with "one count of attempted rape, one count of controlling and coercive behaviour and one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm"?

On topic, I've said before and my opinion hasn't changed, I don't think likes should be given out in this thread or about this subject.
Click to expand...

Yes that's correct - 'rape' and 'attempted rape' are 2 different charges though, Mendy for example was charged with both.

I no longer give out any Likes in controversial threads.
 
Separate from the charges, isn't their fairly clear audio of, you know, a woman being raped? I don't know how that's strawman really unless you're absolutely blinkered beyond repair.

JB08 said:
Genuine thought - is this the worst (football-related) thread in Caf history?

To say it is tough reading is an understatement really.
Click to expand...

This and the Qatar/club sale thread are the only two contenders for that illustrious title. Both exposed a large section of our support to be immoral wankers of the highest order. Also the hallmark of both threads were circular discussions where nobody on either side is convinced about anything because they set up camp in their tower of bullshite and don't want to come down from it.

HOWEVER, this thread resulted in Mainoldo getting banned so I think the Qatar/club sale one might slightly edge it. Very marginal though.
 
Redlambs said:
Off topic of your point, you've said this before, but was he not charged with "one count of attempted rape, one count of controlling and coercive behaviour and one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm"?

On topic, I've said before and my opinion hasn't changed, I don't think likes should be given out in this thread or about this subject.
Click to expand...
golden_blunder said:
That’s what I thought too
Click to expand...

Accused of Attempted rape and Accused of Rape are different charges .
 
Rood said:
There is disagreement over what he said - the ref report says 'feck You' (still harsh red but understandable) but his manager claims it was 'feck Sake' or something along those lines, probably not worth appealing anyway
Click to expand...

The hand signals sound like they contributed as well.
 
Rood said:
Yes that's correct - 'rape' and 'attempted rape' are 2 different charges though, Mendy for example was charged with both.
Click to expand...

I am aware of that, though I believe they do carry the same sentencing (at least maximum term), but I don't think adding "attempted" before every utterance of the word really makes much of a difference. But then I don't make jokes about it, so I'm not the authority there.


gajender said:
Accused of Attempted rape and Accused of Rape are different charges .
Click to expand...

See above.
 
Litch said:
Yep and my fault. I wrongly thought you had to demonstrate a level of balance and objectivity in how you voiced it, and the standard bearer for the forum even if in a voluntary capacity.

There is a difference between having an opinion to using your position in how you voice it. It still comes with a level of responsibility irrespective of your personal view or opinion (or a least that is what I thought)?
Click to expand...
This is a ridiculous take. Mods have been highly criticized by both pro- and anti-Greenwood posters alike, and this shows that they have done a relatively good job at allowing a discussion to take place. They have also banned staunch anti-Greenwood posters from this thread and deleted comments (mine included) that crossed lines with respect to anti-Greenwood sentiment.

What you don't like is mods being opinionated on this emotive subject, as is their right. And that says more about you.
 
Litch said:
Yep and my fault. I wrongly thought you had to demonstrate a level of balance and objectivity in how you voiced it, and the standard bearer for the forum even if in a voluntary capacity.

There is a difference between having an opinion to using your position in how you voice it. It still comes with a level of responsibility irrespective of your personal view or opinion (or a least that is what I thought)?
Click to expand...

This is not the case here. Mods participate in discussions just like everyone else and there is no quixotic or utopian expectation of "balance and objectivity" in one's personal opinion, which is completely separate from the day to day modding aspects of keeping threads on track. Both can be easily done, and have been for many years.
 
Wibble said:
Apparently that is exactly what he said - according to a local report someone posted earlier. If he didn't why was he sent off?

And the language is a bit irrelevant as I'm fairly sure a Spanish ref would know the phrase in multiple languages.
Click to expand...
I don’t know, hence why asked, assumed it was facts based on posts here.

Googled now, manager says discussed and he didn’t say that (“feck off”) exactly .. may be down to a combination of a poor ref and language (hence why asked what language… which could be relevant).

And I’m fairly sure a ref knows it in numerous languages too… must hear it all the time.
 
Redlambs said:
I am aware of that, though I believe they do carry the same sentencing (at least maximum term), but I don't think adding "attempted" before every utterance of the word really makes much of a difference. But then I don't make jokes about it, so I'm not the authority there.




See above.
Click to expand...

I think it does make a difference.
For example, we have someone above claiming that the audio clearly shows someone being raped but it obviously doesn't, and I'm assuming that's exactly why that particular charge was bought by the CPS.

Still the audio is horrible and we have no idea what happened before or after so it's fair enough that Greenwood gets some criticism for it. But for me, until more facts are clear, it's not right for anyone to refer to Greenwood as a rapist (and many have done). It's also potentially libelous for this Forum.
 
Rood said:
I think it does make a difference.
For example, we have someone above claiming that the audio clearly shows someone being raped but it obviously doesn't, and I'm assuming that's exactly why that particular charge was bought by the CPS.

Still the audio is horrible and we have no idea what happened before or after so it's fair enough that Greenwood gets some criticism for it. But for me, until more facts are clear, it's not right for anyone to refer to Greenwood as a rapist (and many have done). It's also potentially libelous for this Forum.
Click to expand...
I do agree it does make a difference in terms of fair discussion of what he is accused of. So if we are going to be discussing it in legal terms yes the distinction should be made.

I disagree that it should absolve him from being criticised for rapist like behaviour and also being branded as one. If someone speaks in the way he did I would 100% assume his full intent was to perform the act and therefore while their is a legal distinction between attempt and actually carrying out of an act trying to rape someone or threatening it for me makes you morally as corrupt and undeserving of sympathy, respect and such like and shows you to be a real threat worthy of branding with an unpleasant societal label.

So while there is no smoking gun to evidence it there is enough in the public domain to enable people to have that opinion of him. Hand on heart would anyone who heard that from a colleague at work be comfortable around them again with no other context being explained to you? Would you think the worst or be naturally inclined to give them another chance?
 
Rood said:
Libellous comments about the alleged victim's father/family are allowed here all the time because it supports some agendas.

The Moderation of this thread is not balanced in the slightest - either allow all speculative theories or none.
Click to expand...

How anyone can look at this thread and think “they’re being too harsh on the people defending Greenwood” is absolutely beyond me.

Anyway, for a player who has been sent away on loan because there is footage of him apparently trying to rape his girlfriend, getting sent off for dissent is ridiculous.

Anyway, if we include goals against semi pro players for Greenwood, he’s currently scored one more goal than Bebe this season. I see no reason to bring him back from a footballing point of view either.
 
Rood said:
I think it does make a difference.
For example, we have someone above claiming that the audio clearly shows someone being raped but it obviously doesn't, and I'm assuming that's exactly why that particular charge was bought by the CPS.

Still the audio is horrible and we have no idea what happened before or after so it's fair enough that Greenwood gets some criticism for it. But for me, until more facts are clear, it's not right for anyone to refer to Greenwood as a rapist (and many have done). It's also potentially libelous for this Forum.
Click to expand...

I meant in terms of the "jokes" about it mate.
 
BenitoSTARR said:
I do agree it does make a difference in terms of fair discussion of what he is accused of. So if we are going to be discussing it in legal terms yes the distinction should be made.

I disagree that it should absolve him from being criticised for rapist like behaviour and also being branded as one. If someone speaks in the way he did I would 100% assume his full intent was to perform the act and therefore while their is a legal distinction between attempt and actually carrying out of an act trying to rape someone or threatening it for me makes you morally as corrupt and undeserving of sympathy, respect and such like and shows you to be a real threat worthy of branding with an unpleasant societal label.

So while there is no smoking gun to evidence it there is enough in the public domain to enable people to have that opinion of him. Hand on heart would anyone who heard that from a colleague at work be comfortable around them again with no other context being explained to you? Would you think the worst or be naturally inclined to give them another chance?
Click to expand...
Agreed, if what he was saying on the audio was racist, we wouldn't need definitive proof of hate in his heart, or context, in order to call him a racist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.