If the victim and her family are forgiving him and giving him a second chance, I really dont know why we can’t
Last edited:
Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player
- Thread starter keithsingleton
- Start date
- Status
I’ve never seen such drivel in all of my life.
After how he was treated? Seriously?
As bad as your take on left footed penalty takers.
And 70million
Last edited:
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?
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.
"I really don't know why we can't" ?
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.
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.
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.
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 ?
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.
More whataboutism. Great. Just what this thread needs.
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.
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?
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.
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.
After how he was treated? Seriously?
As bad as your take on left footed penalty takers.
And 70million
nail meets head.
Quality control
Virtue signinal signalling B.S. that's the hallmark of utter intellectual dwafism and dishonesty.
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.
Good to know
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 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.
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.
Last edited:
Instead of viewing it as whataboutism, perhaps look at it as a comparison. I dislike whataboutism as much as the next guy tbh.
For someone talking about intellectual deficiencies it's surprising you can't spell dwarfism or, seemingly, proofread.
Nail hit firmly on the head.
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.
False comparison much?
With a disingenuous hammer.
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.
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
Might want to reread the cps statement again.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
That's quite clearly not how he sees it.
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.
- Status