Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

[kaku06]

Guys - this is the genuine response of someone. He is talking about me living somewhere that was gentrified and then moving.

This is the level of discourse.

Good for you i say. And to be dead honest i don't hold it against you or blame you in any shape or form but you my friend remind me of "offended by everything ashamed of nothing".

Calling people rapists apologists just because they have a different opinion which is fuelled by mostly two reasons is shameful. One is him maybe repenting and moving on in life with same girl and is now a father of a beautiful baby with her, two is them being desperate and worried about the state of their beloved football club and being blinded by that love coupled with point one. Now people might still be wrong in your eyes but to call them rapists apologists is pathetic. But when you got accused you didn't like it. Did you? How the turntables, screaming "guys guys guys" trying to gather people to be on your side complaining about the level of discourse. Funny.

 

[quiet_united]

If the victim and her family are forgiving him and giving him a second chance, I really dont know why we can’t

 

[Wumminator]

Good for you i say. And to be dead honest i don't hold it against you or blame you in any shape or form but you my friend remind me of "offended by everything ashamed of nothing".

Calling people rapists apologists just because they have a different opinion which is fuelled by mostly two reasons is shameful. One is him maybe repenting and moving on in life with same girl and is now a father of a beautiful baby with her, two is them being desperate and worried about the state of their beloved football club and being blinded by that love coupled with point one. Now people might still be wrong in your eyes but to call them rapists apologists is pathetic. But when you got accused you didn't like it. Did you? How the turntables, screaming "guys guys guys" trying to gather people to be on your side complaining about the level of discourse. Funny.

I’ve never seen such drivel in all of my life.

 

[Wibble]

I hope we can make 70M from him. I still hope he never plays for us nor in England, nor for England ever again after how he was treated

After how he was treated? Seriously?

As bad as your take on left footed penalty takers.

And 70million

 

[Raoul]

After how he was treated? Seriously?

As bad as your take on left footed penalty takers.

Thus says Wibble

 

[Wibble]

If Ronaldo can return to this club then why can't Greenwood?

WTF has one thing go to do with the other?

And if it did, in some parallel universe, surely Ronaldo's return being an utter disaster would suggest that it was a terrible idea?

 

[Wibble]

Thus says Wibble

If only I could be so punished, forced to take millions of dollars in pay before being offered the opportunity to earn millions more playing professional sport in Spain. How he was treated FFS.

 

[Raoul]

If the victim and her family are forgiving him and giving him a second chance I really dont know we can’.

"I really don't know why we can't" ?

 

[Thom Merrilin]

WTF has one thing go to do with the other?

And if it did, in some parallel universe, surely Ronaldo's return being an utter disaster would suggest that it was a terrible idea?

Both being accused of sexual misconduct would be my guess.

Ronaldo's return was a disaster mostly because of on field issues wasn't it? After it turned bad on the pitch is when things went sideways off it.

Personally I was super excited about Ronaldo returning so I find it difficult to parse that with my feelings towards Greenwood.

 

[cafecillos]

Disagree. I don't want Greenwood back as I feel he genuinely is a bad egg, however I understand those who choose to have an open mind about it feel there might be more to the stuff posted online which may lead to a different conclusion to what most of us decided - it's perfectly possible and it doesn't have to be "wilful ignorance, DC/DA apologism, or worse" for such folks to think so.

P/S: I do want us to sell him for good money though!

They don't choose to have an open mind any more than I do though, they just value football more than what he looks like he did, or worse. The thing is I've not concocted a crazy scenario in which Mason Greenwood is a piece of shit and an alleged domestic abuser and/or rapist just for the lolz, out of thin air, I'm basing my opinion of him on what we know, plain and simple, information and evidence that we all have and that hasn't been discredited or contradicted. And if the day comes when one or more of the random theories, based on little to no evidence so far, that exonerate him turns out to be plausibly or demostrably true, I'll happily reasses, because I actually want a society with fewer domestic abusers and rapists, and I certainly don't want Mason Greenwood to be one. And I can do that because I'm just an internet forum user and as such I'm not bound by jurisdictional guarantees like the presumption of innocence, no matter how many times his supporters want to incorrectly make us believe that's the level of certainty required for random Redcafe users, and what I think and post about him has absolutely no legal effect whatsoever on Mason Greenwood.

 

[padzilla]

It's such a mess but the most telling thing for me is the absence of a plausible explanation as to what actually happened.

If a credible alternative explanation was provided, this all goes away pretty quickly.

By not providing that, it suggests the worst suspicions are in fact correct.

 

[Raoul]

It's such a mess but the most telling thing for me is the absence of a plausible explanation as to what actually happened.

If a credible alternative explanation was provided, this all goes away pretty quickly.

By not providing that, it suggests the worst suspicions are in fact correct.

What do you think about the idea that something sufficiently credible was provided to the United hierarchy to where they felt it justifiable to make plans to bring him back into the squad ? Do you think the club would’ve still proceeded if they were convinced he was guilty of what he was accused of ?

 

[BristolRuss]

And it seems watching our team too

So staff members are allowed to call other members bell ends now? If a regular user had posted that they would have received a warning if not an outright ban. I guess having "please be respectful" in the thread title is more of a suggestion than a rule for some people.

 

[Wibble]

Both being accused of sexual misconduct would be my guess.

Ronaldo's return was a disaster mostly because of on field issues wasn't it? After it turned bad on the pitch is when things went sideways off it.

Personally I was super excited about Ronaldo returning so I find it difficult to parse that with my feelings towards Greenwood.

More whataboutism. Great. Just what this thread needs.

 

[Wumminator]

So staff members are allowed to call other members bell ends now? If a regular user had posted that they would have received a warning if not an outright ban. I guess having "please be respectful" in the thread title is more of a suggestion than a rule for some people.

No one would ever get a ban for posting that.

fecking hell.

 

[rimaldo]

I don't believe in his innocence but do believe in second chances, more so when the actual victim is giving him one.

totally agree. jesus always forgives me of my sins, as long as i confess them. and if someone as great as jesus can forgive me. then that’s surely all that’s needed. so ok for me to come and run through your wife and kids? i’m sure a load of people on the internet wouldn’t care i was running through your wife and kids either. so it’s basically a victimless crime.

 

[padzilla]

What do you think about the idea that something sufficiently credible was provided to the United hierarchy to where they felt it justifiable to make plans to bring him back into the squad ? Do you think the club would’ve still proceeded if they were convinced he was guilty of what he was accused of ?

The issue I have with that is by not disclosing it looks to many that no credible explanation actually existed and they were trying to sneak him back because he was good at football. Not disclosing it robbed him of a chance of setting the record straight to supporters... unless the record was already straight.

What possible other explanation could be worse than the vast majority of people believing you are a rapist who got away with it because you had the means to buy the silence of those who could incriminate you?

 

[Member 117152]

This thread is such a mess. Considering the divisiveness we have to just break the bank for another potential world class RW.

End of the day a lot of the people who despise Greenwood love Mike Tyson who said the best backhand he ever gave in his life was to his ex wife.

I know times were different but you can get smarter and forgive these things people did when they were like 21 years old. Basically a kid still.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

After how he was treated? Seriously?

As bad as your take on left footed penalty takers.

And 70million

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

My wife who occasionally watches United games with me knew about this story when it broke out and was appalled at first (I was obviously appalled when I heard the news too).

But as someone who is quite into social media (More than me for sure), she's always said everything on social media is not real (i.e. with things like deep faked videos, unrealistic beauty standards, fake advice, image doctoring, even AI influencers these days) / lacks context most of the time (e.g. clipping a segment out of a Ricky Gervais/Dave Chapelle show and posting it to cause controversy - Not saying this is the exact situation here, but you get the idea). She's generally a skeptic who doesn't like to believe in stories until there is definitive proof, which is why she followed the Heard/Depp case with some interest (Even gave me weekly updates). She also thinks the whole 'believe women' agenda that is taking over the world these days is a little bit OTT, given that women are completely capable of being as bad as men - It's not that she's skeptical of HR, just that the agenda shouldn't weigh in on the facts.

On this particular case: Given the outcomes of both internal and external investigations, she thinks it should be up-to whoever that has complete information on the case, to decide. However, she also thinks that there is usually no smoke without fire - Meaning Greenwood isn't some kind of saint, but to call him a rapist/sexual abuser/threatener is a bit much without context/actual witness testimony (Given HR had withdrawn any initial statements she made + alluded to the fact that her phone was hacked) for the leaked snippets of evidence that are out there. I would say that's a similar opinion to mine despite our different genders. I should caveat all this by stating though that she's also more socially/politically conservative leaning than the average person (not because of her upbringing, but by her own choice/values) and isn't quick to trust people at all, so others may see this differently.

Also it's not that I don't give a shit - I think most of us who think there's a viable case for him to make a return (Based on United's own investigation btw, not because the couple got back together or anything along those lines) don't think he's a nice guy, and definitely don't condone DV and sexual abuse. Which, I think is the problem on this forum (And others) because anyone who says the club should consider bringing him back suddenly becomes a rape sympathiser/rapist enabler, which are not true.

nail meets head.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Nah, the don't-know-all-the-facts position is quite frankly intellectually dishonest, at best. I don't need to go through those people's posting history to know that I'd find posts by them making all kinds of assumptions with little to no knowledge of any of the "facts". They just simply want to make us think this is the subject where that can't be done, because they want Greenwood back at United and they need him not to be as terrible a person as he seems to be. But the thing is, and it's been posted quite literally dozens of times now, this not a court of law, this is a fecking internet forum, and we are not judges, we are fecking internet forum users and as such we can't violate his presumption of innocence, which is (and again, this has been clarified dozens of times before, by me and many other posters) exclusively a jurisdictional principle/guarantee. What I think about Greenwood has absolutely 0 legal consequences for him, and that's why I can think whatever the hell I want, as I'm not subjected to the rigorous burden of proof that is required for a criminal conviction. Many users insist that that's the level of certainty required to legitimately not want Greenwood back at United, which is patently and demonstrably incorrect and, as I said, intellectually dishonest at best. I have more respect for the few posters who don't hide behind that fluff and openly admit that they want him back regardless as he's good at football. Everything else is either wilful ignorance, DV/DA apologism, or worse, but I want to believe very few posters, if any, are in that third category.

Virtue signinal signalling B.S. that's the hallmark of utter intellectual dwafism and dishonesty.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Extravagant leaps of logic such as listening to a recording of someone being battered and then assuming that it’s real?



You said you feel sorry for Greenwood. Pathetic

Yes. Extravagant leaps of logic. Here you are 'convinced he is a woman batterer" based off an audio leaked on social media, that you have zero context about nor any actual expertize to make conclusive analysis on. Just based off your arbirtary personal moral code that supposedly makes you miraculously superior to no one eager to take the leap with you. Just because unlike you they aren't prepared to destroy his entire
future as a human and any earning potential he has, to provide for a family on the way, for an alleged crime he has NEVER been found guilty of. By ANY due process.

Its utterly no surprise you are blatantly oblivious to both how pathetic that is, based off of mere feelings and your personal speculation off a freaking social media post.

Its even more incredible you are blatantly oblivious to how pathetic you actually sound each time you make your claims.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Just wanted to pick up this point specifically, as I have seen it (or variations of it) mentioned a number of times in this thread. This is an Americanism with absolutely no meaning in this or any other criminal case in England and Wales - no member of the public in England and Wales can "press charges". Charging decisions are entirely at the discretion of the Crown Prosecution Service and are made after reviewing submissions by the police.

Good to know

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

You speak a lot of about people deciding that they want to believe he is guilty and cancelling him in this situation, but you always seem to speak about Greenwood as if you believe him to be innocent. Have you not also just made you mind up without knowing everything?

To me he remains innocent until proven guilty. End of story. My personal feelings on his questonable morals and lack of proper character, have zero bearing on that reality. I refuse to condemn ANYONE as guilty based off speculation, personal moral code and group think. Esecially because in my corner of the world I've seen first hand time and again what the opposite does.

It's not just some case where someone has gone in and made a complaint, the vast majority of us have seen and heard things that are pretty incriminating. I don't understand how people are going to believe he didn't do anything wrong without an explanation. Half the explanations offered in here read like wild fantasies. How could you feel comfortable having him play for the club without a decent explanation?

Because first, most people "demanding explanation" don't really want any, based off their reaction when they heard MG was set to be reinstated an interviewed about what happened. Then second, I personally don't need any because I don't watch football to know nor understand everything about the lives of those who play for the club I support.

We can talk about the CPS and the club possibly having information that we don't, but when people are using them as justification for siding with Greenwood people seem lean on that far too much. There are reasons that the CPS can drop charges, even going off the statement they made, which aren't because there was something clearing him. The less said about the club's handling of the situation the better.

What's 'too much" rather is people constantly pretending "they know better" than custodians of the actual law. Who have access to the facts at hand that nobody on social media leaping to snap judgment has yet they STILL didn't condemn him.

Those are the ones constantly leaning on the claim "nothing clearing him was found" simlly because of their "I saw the video/heard the clip, he is guilty! " Stance.

The rest are simply leaning on the bladant fact nothing has been proven. So proposed condemnation and cancelation still has no basis in evidence nor fact to back it up, except sentiment and group think mob rule, which we are at loathe to participate in.


Personally I respect anyone's choice to believe him guilty and preferring he never presents the club they support again. I can see where they are coming from. However I will NEVER respect any such person thinking it makes them some how morally superior nor that their personal prefference should be the prevailing choice for all.

 

[Thom Merrilin]

More whataboutism. Great. Just what this thread needs.

Instead of viewing it as whataboutism, perhaps look at it as a comparison. I dislike whataboutism as much as the next guy tbh.

 

[Pickle85]

Virtue signinal signalling B.S. that's the hallmark of utter intellectual dwafism and dishonesty.

For someone talking about intellectual deficiencies it's surprising you can't spell dwarfism or, seemingly, proofread.

 

[Highlyevolved]

Anyone that watched the World Cup, the Spanish Supercup final, heavyweight boxing title fights, following Ronaldo and co on social media etc, are apologists of terrorism funding and apologists of human rights abuse.

Did you watch any of them things?

See anyone can do what you've just done.

Nail hit firmly on the head.

 

[Wibble]

Instead of viewing it as whataboutism, perhaps look at it as a comparison. I dislike whataboutism as much as the next guy tbh.

It is a terrible comparison. So bad it is whataboutism.

Not to say I'd have personally disagreed with us not signing him due to ethical concerns, but moving him on once we signed him (as happened with Greenwood) based on a civil case thrown out with prejudice, that never resulted in criminal charges and events that he had vigorously denied (as opposed to having no explanation for something in plain public view) is an utterly different scenario. So whataboutism. Same with Gigg's moral and ethical failings. And we wouldn't have him back anyway.

 

[Wibble]

Anyone that watched the World Cup, the Spanish Supercup final, heavyweight boxing title fights, following Ronaldo and co on social media etc, are apologists of terrorism funding and apologists of human rights abuse.

Did you watch any of them things?

See anyone can do what you've just done.

False comparison much?

 

[Wibble]

Nail hit firmly on the head.

With a disingenuous hammer.

 

[The holy trinity 68]

How does watching a sporting event equate to wanting an alleged domestic abuser to represent the club you support and care deeply about in your mind?

Most people only want Greenwood at the club so they can watch a good player in a sporting event. Really is no difference. But if you can't see that, then it is probably because you realise your hypocrisy of what you are arguing against.

 

[Gavinb33]

To me he remains innocent until proven guilty. End of story. My personal feelings on his questonable morals and lack of proper character, have zero bearing on that reality. I refuse to condemn ANYONE as guilty based off speculation, personal moral code and group think. Esecially because in my corner of the world I've seen first hand time and again what the opposite does.


Because firs, most people "demanding explanation" don't really want any, based off their reaction when they heard MG was set to be reinstated an interviewed about what happened. Then second, I personally don't need any because I don't watch football to know nor understand everything about the lives of those who play for the club I support.


What's 'too much" rather is people constantly pretending "they know better" than custodians of the actual law. Who have access to the facts at hand that nobody on social media leaping to snap judgment has yet they STILL didn't condemn him.

Those are the ones constantly leaning on the claim "nothing clearing him was found" simlly because of their "I saw the video/heard the clip, he is guilty! " Stance.

The rest are simply leaning on the bladang fact nothing has been proven. So proposed condemnation and cancelation still has no basis in evidence nor fact to back it up, except sentiment and group think mob rule, which we are at loathe to participate in


Personally I respect anyone's choice to believe him guilty and preferring he never presents the club they support again. I can see where they are coming from. However I will NEVER respect any such person thinking it makes them some how morally superior nor that their personal prefference should be the prevailing choice for all.

I mean the only reason the case was dropped was because the material witness dropped out, nothing about new evidence or anything just that person wasn't going to testify, this he wasnt found guilty nonsense that people are using to absolve him of any wrongdoing is completely wrong, if I rob a bank tomorrow and everyone knew I did it but there was no evidence I wouldn't go to jail I still fecking robbed the bank though

 

[flameinthesun]

I mean the only reason the case was dropped was because the material witness dropped out, nothing about new evidence or anything

Might want to reread the cps statement again.

 

[Withnail]

It's such a mess but the most telling thing for me is the absence of a plausible explanation as to what actually happened.

If a credible alternative explanation was provided, this all goes away pretty quickly.

By not providing that, it suggests the worst suspicions are in fact correct.

Well exactly there is no credible explanation for the audio and he'll never directly address it.

All the arguments about CPS etc fall completely flat because this isn't a court of law and it doesn't need to be. In the end there wasn't a realistic prospect of conviction but we all heard the audio, there is no reasonable explanation and for me someone like that isn't fit to represent the club. It's very simple.

 

[padzilla]

Well exactly there is no credible explanation for the audio and he'll never directly address it.

All the arguments about CPS etc fall completely flat because this isn't a court of law and it doesn't need to be. In the end there wasn't a realistic prospect of conviction but we all heard the audio, there is no reasonable explanation and for me someone like that isn't fit to represent the club. It's very simple.

That's the crux of it for me too. The audio being out there and no reasonable alternative explanation being available makes it clear to me he is not fit to represent the club again.

To me it's astonishing that no explanation has been made public, if he's innocent of what people suspect he has done.

The only logical conclusion is that he is not in fact innocent, otherwise the club would have been making it very clear what actually happened at the earliest opportunity.

There should be a higher treshold for representing a club like Man United than there is for the treshold to merely avoid criminal prosecution.

 

[Solius]

There's only two possibilities, even if you're being disengenous with yourself:

1. The audio and images are fake or taken horribly out of context in which case if you're wholly innocent and just absolutely stitched up you'd immediately provide the context, make the statement, not talk about 'making mistakes' in your statement, etc.. and Utd would've been like oh wow this is such a big misunderstanding.

2. The audio and images are real and he has at the very least beaten her on multiple occasions (or one sustained assault) and threatened her with what he said on that audio.

There are also patterns of behaviour. Did Giggs act the twat once and then stop? Did Rooney stop sleeping around? Can you imagine if the club did actually take him back, give him a new deal and then he repeats anything close to this? It would be catastrophic. It's very common in relationships that have had a history of abuse for the pair to reconcile over and over again, before getting comfortable and falling back into the same patterns.

Let someone else make the mistake. It's not worth it just for your football team to play slightly better.

 

[antohan]

totally agree. jesus always forgives me of my sins, as long as i confess them. and if someone as great as jesus can forgive me. then that’s surely all that’s needed. so ok for me to come and run through your wife and kids? i’m sure a load of people on the internet wouldn’t care i was running through your wife and kids either. so it’s basically a victimless crime.

You didn't read on, did you?

I went on to indicate giving him that 2nd chance is ultimately a gamble on his character being worthy of it (which none of us is in any position to judge) and that if regular club staff who will have interacted with him for years want nothing to do with him that's a strong indication we shouldn't.

But yeah, go on and reply the first load of crap that crosses your mind.

 

[Pickle85]

Most people only want Greenwood at the club so they can watch a good player in a sporting event. Really is no difference. But if you can't see that, then it is probably because you realise your hypocrisy of what you are arguing against.

For a team that they support. The affinity many supporters feel with the club means they don't want an alleged domestic abuser representing it. And watching a world cup or whatever utterly ludicrous false equivalences you draw doesn't change that.

 

[The holy trinity 68]

For a team that they support. The affinity many supporters feel with the club means they don't want an alleged domestic abuser representing it. And watching a world cup or whatever utterly ludicrous false equivalences you draw doesn't change that.

But it is all entertainment at the end of the day, whether you are watching the team you support play or other teams, you are still being entertained, so there is not much difference in either.

 

[antohan]

But it is all entertainment at the end of the day, whether you are watching the team you support play or other teams, you are still being entertained, so there is not much difference in either.

That's quite clearly not how he sees it.

How does watching a sporting event equate to wanting an alleged domestic abuser to represent the club you support and care deeply about in your mind?

You are crying wolf on hypocrisy and double standards, he is saying you pick the fights that are closer to your heart.

Neither of you is wrong really, they are just manifestations of how your feelings have landed you at different takes on it all.