Well don’t mention him in the same breath. He’s not relevant to the topic.
perhaps I need to say it again. Cantona’s reaction to provocation was a reaction that any one of us might come to if the fan hits the right note. Of course being a professional sportsman you’d expect him not to react but I can understand why he did it. That does not mean that I welcome violence as you are insinuating.
greenwood, it’s not natural to behave like that and nor can I understand it.
there is a world of difference
I’ll ignore the jibe about me potentially hitting women. That’s your friendly warning.
Golden_Blunder there is no equivalence between what Adam Johnson did and what Mason Greenwood was accused of either. You have been captious in your responses to myself and others with whom you disagree - I would appreciate if a moderator who isn't emotionally invested in the subject and has impartial views on it would review the content as I feel you're being incredibly unfair- on what I thought was a fair and respectful post (and many others could see this too). I'm entitled to an opinion and you're entitled to disagree with it too but to try and imply I made false inequivalences- between Greenwood and Cantona, which I didn't isn't being genuine. There are a group of very active posters in this thread who all share the same view which seem to want to gang up on anyone who doesn't share their opinion and discredit them - that is not genuine and incredibly unfair in my opinion. It's no surprise to see the most active people all share the same view when anyone who says otherwise has to fight against a smear campaign where their posts are taken out of context.
I don't wish to discuss Cantona anymore as the subject isn't about Cantona and there was never any equivalence drawn by myself between the crimes. Just like there was no equivalence drawn between the crimes of Adam Johnson and Mason Greenwoods alleged crimes by myself either.
I made a fair, rationale and honest post expressing my views, some of which I noted would be unpopular but they're my beliefs and what I stand behind - it certainly wasn't ingenuine or an attempt to draw false equivalences which some have tried to imply. I have strong feelings on rehabilitation of all criminals and it's something I feel passionate about and that includes those convicted of crimes against children too which I shared. I know this is a deeply unpopular view to hold but I'm being honest and I've tried to explain why I hold those views as best I can. I don't expect many to agree but it is upsetting for some to imply I'm not genuine because Eric Cantona's name appeared. I couldn't be more honest and genuine if I tried.
I apologise for my reaction to you and others but I feel I have been ganged up on here and had my views taken out of context and as a result of that I've had to go on the defensive. There was a post by another poster a few days ago stating something along the lines of "I can understand why some never want him to play for the club again as that comes from a morale place" and that post stuck with me when I read it but I only had time to respond with my views yesterday. I find that deeply offensive as it implies that anyone who supports the return to the workplace of people accused or who have committed crimes don't have morals. Others have suggested that wanting a player to return to a pitch are domestic violence apologists too which again is deeply unfair. Being a supporter of rehabilitation and reintegration of criminals does not mean you don't have morals or that you support the crimes they committed or make excuses for the crimes they committed. It is possible to both support rehab/reintegration and also be opposed to the crimes committed.
The comment about supporting violence if "pushed" was a low blow by me and I honestly do apologise for that. I hope you can now see though how others in the "greenwood should rot" camp make other posters feel when they accuse them of being domestic violence apologists too - it's not nice and I hope moving forward the same standards are applied to those too.
Again I apologize unreservedly for any offense caused to yourself and admit I acted out of frustration after feeling I was being ganged up on. It was annoying to see what I thought was a challenging post to articulate which took me great time to compose be completely ignored by others being, what I feel to be captious and focusing on one small aspect of it to try and, what I believe, was an attempt to discredit me. Maybe I've read the room wrong and picked you up incorrectly on that but not at any stage did I draw any equivalence between Greenwoods alleged crimes and Cantonas crimes and I feel this then took the thread off topic and the bulk of my reasonable post then went completely ignored.
We can agree to disagree on this - I've already stated that I expect my views are deeply unpopular and I'm not trying to convince anyone in to my way of thinking but I do have an entitlement to share them. If my character is being attacked or if my views are being taken out of context then I also have an entitlement to correct that too.
Once again sorry for any offence caused to you and others for my reaction but I felt I was being unfairly attacked.
