Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

[DJ Jeff]

I thought he was one of the world's best talents in 2020, but I don't think he's retained it all that well after the absence. I don't think he will ever play for the club again or should, but I'm starting to think we won't get that much money for him when he's fecked off either.

for a while he looked like he was doing alright there, not so much recently. Maybe he will kick on towards the end of the season and we can get a good fee for him.

 

[Yagami]

His highlights against Sevilla a few pages ago was deleted so I found it reuploaded here:



Very promising. Looking forward to seeing him against Madrid and Barca. He'd have been non-existent had he faced them earlier on in the season, but I can see him putting in a good performance now that he's getting back to the required physical levels needed in the top leagues.

 

[duffer]

Has he played CF at all for them?

 

[Lash]

Has he played CF at all for them?

Nope. I don't think he will unless they sell Mayoral.

 

[flameinthesun]

Has he played CF at all for them?

He's played 1 or 2 games in the very beginning as a No10/supporting striker from memory behind Mayoral but the majority of the games he's played on the right side in what seems a 4 4 2 formation.

 

[Pickle85]

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.

I'm not crying wolf on hypocrisy, as nothing I've done or said is hypocritical. Nor do I have double standards. Double standards would imply that the two things he compared are related or comparable but they're not. They're absolutely, entirely different and I'm not even sure how that's up for debate.

 

[antohan]

I'm not crying wolf on hypocrisy, as nothing I've done or said is hypocritical. Nor do I have double standards. Double standards would imply that the two things he compared are related or comparable but they're not. They're absolutely, entirely different and I'm not even sure how that's up for debate.

I was saying he was crying wolf and you are picking your fights.

Blimey

 

[Pickle85]

I was saying he was crying wolf and you are picking your fights.

Blimey

Apologies, I obviously misunderstood.

 

[RedRocket08]

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.

IMO the possibilities you have mentioned fall on ends of a spectrum (The black and white of this debate imo) - There is also possibly a third (Which I'll explain below - I don't subscribe to this possibility personally, just saying there could be another scenario) or even more possibilities though:

Maybe he was abusive towards her at least verbally, but didn't exactly mean those things (E.g. Threats to rape). People with serious anger issues for example say plenty of horrible things that they don't mean - I wouldn't say I have anger issues but I am guilty of that and have done that on rare occasions (I haven't threatened to rape someone sure but I have verbally abused people - some who deserved it, some who probably didn't). Perhaps these are the mistakes MG and Richard Arnold refer to in their statements - speculation on my part here sure, but everyone is speculating on this thread. The audio taken together with the photos on the surface makes it more incriminating, but images can be doctored quite easily these days and even audio to an extent (speculation again but enforced by the fact that the victim said her phone was hacked). The images could also be real but posted out of context, not by the victim but by said hacker - The thing is, we don't know. The victim in this situation might just want to move on from this period of her life and just wants nothing to do with it - she has no obligation to Manchester United fans or the media to do some kind of 'tell-all' (Even if the alleged offences didn't happen in the way they are assumed, just revisiting this sort of drama in your life will bring back old traumas) and MG also wants to stay out of it out of respect for her wishes, while also knowing that Manchester United/England are not the be all and end all of his footballing career.

There could be more possibilities to this story, we just don't know what they are is what I think - maybe time will tell.

Your point about Greenwood doing this again in the future is also possible. If that is how United see it and want to get rid, I would like the club to put their money where their mouth is and donate all of Greenwood's transfer fees (They don't have to say it's Greenwood's fees, they can just make a donation) to a DV/Sexual Abuse Victims' charity in partnership with the Women's and Men's teams - This is my personal opinion of course (I'm sure some would disagree) but we should not be profiting a cent off an alleged sexual abuser if we really want to be on the right side of history on this.

 

[antohan]

Apologies, I obviously misunderstood.

No worries

 

[adexkola]

If that is how United see it and want to get rid, I would like the club to put their money where their mouth is and donate all of Greenwood's transfer fees (They don't have to say it's Greenwood's fees, they can just make a donation) to a DV/Sexual Abuse Victims' charity in partnership with the Women's and Men's teams - This is my personal opinion of course (I'm sure some would disagree) but we should not be profiting a cent off an alleged sexual abuser if we really want to be on the right side of history on this.

Let it be on record that I would be utterly appalled and disgusted if the club did this in a way that impacted football operations (FFP, etc)

If the Glazers want to match the transfer fee with an unrelated donation to such, then sure

 

[andersj]

I thought he was one of the world's best talents in 2020, but I don't think he's retained it all that well after the absence. I don't think he will ever play for the club again or should, but I'm starting to think we won't get that much money for him when he's fecked off either.

for a while he looked like he was doing alright there, not so much recently. Maybe he will kick on towards the end of the season and we can get a good fee for him.

Thought it was the other way around. Started slowly, but have become more and more impressive?

 

[RedRocket08]

Let it be on record that I would be utterly appalled and disgusted if the club did this in a way that impacted football operations (FFP, etc)

If the Glazers want to match the transfer fee with an unrelated donation to such, then sure

No way the Glazers do it. If the club really wanted to, they could probably do it without impacting FFP (I'm not sure about the specifics tbh) with some kind of approval from the FA as well, similar to how businesses get tax benefits for donations. It reduces his transfer fee (if there even is one) from our budget of course, but hey we have the Prem's best youth academy If we're considering all the Greenwood out-ers reasoning on this (And I do respect their reasons and think they also have valid points, while being Greenwood-in myself). I think this is the best thing the club can do if they decide to sell, otherwise the club still leaves itself open to criticism - and Redcafe comes back full circle and ends up with a 'What do we do with Mason Greenwood's money' thread instead of a Mason Greenwood thread.

Edit: I would add to this by saying that famous fan you mentioned some time back would most definitely bring this up, just for the clicks if not to further reinforce her views on DV related issues in sports (If we are talking about the same person this is).

 

[Rood]

IMO the possibilities you have mentioned fall on ends of a spectrum (The black and white of this debate imo) - There is also possibly a third (Which I'll explain below - I don't subscribe to this possibility personally, just saying there could be another scenario) or even more possibilities though:

Maybe he was abusive towards her at least verbally, but didn't exactly mean those things (E.g. Threats to rape). People with serious anger issues for example say plenty of horrible things that they don't mean - I wouldn't say I have anger issues but I am guilty of that and have done that on rare occasions (I haven't threatened to rape someone sure but I have verbally abused people - some who deserved it, some who probably didn't). Perhaps these are the mistakes MG and Richard Arnold refer to in their statements - speculation on my part here sure, but everyone is speculating on this thread. The audio taken together with the photos on the surface makes it more incriminating, but images can be doctored quite easily these days and even audio to an extent (speculation again but enforced by the fact that the victim said her phone was hacked). The images could also be real but posted out of context, not by the victim but by said hacker - The thing is, we don't know. The victim in this situation might just want to move on from this period of her life and just wants nothing to do with it - she has no obligation to Manchester United fans or the media to do some kind of 'tell-all' (Even if the alleged offences didn't happen in the way they are assumed, just revisiting this sort of drama in your life will bring back old traumas) and MG also wants to stay out of it out of respect for her wishes, while also knowing that Manchester United/England are not the be all and end all of his footballing career.

There could be more possibilities to this story, we just don't know what they are is what I think - maybe time will tell.

Your point about Greenwood doing this again in the future is also possible. If that is how United see it and want to get rid, I would like the club to put their money where their mouth is and donate all of Greenwood's transfer fees (They don't have to say it's Greenwood's fees, they can just make a donation) to a DV/Sexual Abuse Victims' charity in partnership with the Women's and Men's teams - This is my personal opinion of course (I'm sure some would disagree) but we should not be profiting a cent off an alleged sexual abuser if we really want to be on the right side of history on this.

You are right, there is quite clearly more possibilities than the simplistic black/white options given.

Charity donations would be great but the club investigation found him to be not guilty so unlikely.

 

[flameinthesun]

Thought it was the other way around. Started slowly, but have become more and more impressive?

Yeha it's the opposite he's slowly gotten better and better. Still not at his peak level previously though but he's now clearly the best or one of the best players on the pitch when playing now resulting in their player of the month.

 

[sebsheep]

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.

Innocent until proven guilty means pretty much nothing outside of a court case. I could wonder around talking about how the courts would rather see a guilty man walk free than an innocent one convicted. Actually we might be onto something here!
Which part of speculation, personal moral code and group think do the photos and audio clip come into it?

I think people would love an explanation as to how everything was not as it seems. I don't believe anyone wants any abuse to have taken place. The reaction to the interview and the club's behaviour in general around it was probably more down to the complete misjudgement around what a lot of fans wanted. People didn't want it to be swept under the carpet.

The problem with appealing to the authority of the CPS is that they don't have to believe someone to be innocent to drop and case and they also have got things wrong plenty of times.

Ultimately people are free to look at the information they have and come to a conclusion, and yes we may not know everything, but it does seem strange to me the lengths people will go to defend Greenwood given what we do know.

 

[sebsheep]

IMO the possibilities you have mentioned fall on ends of a spectrum (The black and white of this debate imo) - There is also possibly a third (Which I'll explain below - I don't subscribe to this possibility personally, just saying there could be another scenario) or even more possibilities though:

Maybe he was abusive towards her at least verbally, but didn't exactly mean those things (E.g. Threats to rape). People with serious anger issues for example say plenty of horrible things that they don't mean - I wouldn't say I have anger issues but I am guilty of that and have done that on rare occasions (I haven't threatened to rape someone sure but I have verbally abused people - some who deserved it, some who probably didn't). Perhaps these are the mistakes MG and Richard Arnold refer to in their statements - speculation on my part here sure, but everyone is speculating on this thread. The audio taken together with the photos on the surface makes it more incriminating, but images can be doctored quite easily these days and even audio to an extent (speculation again but enforced by the fact that the victim said her phone was hacked). The images could also be real but posted out of context, not by the victim but by said hacker - The thing is, we don't know. The victim in this situation might just want to move on from this period of her life and just wants nothing to do with it - she has no obligation to Manchester United fans or the media to do some kind of 'tell-all' (Even if the alleged offences didn't happen in the way they are assumed, just revisiting this sort of drama in your life will bring back old traumas) and MG also wants to stay out of it out of respect for her wishes, while also knowing that Manchester United/England are not the be all and end all of his footballing career.

There could be more possibilities to this story, we just don't know what they are is what I think - maybe time will tell.

Your point about Greenwood doing this again in the future is also possible. If that is how United see it and want to get rid, I would like the club to put their money where their mouth is and donate all of Greenwood's transfer fees (They don't have to say it's Greenwood's fees, they can just make a donation) to a DV/Sexual Abuse Victims' charity in partnership with the Women's and Men's teams - This is my personal opinion of course (I'm sure some would disagree) but we should not be profiting a cent off an alleged sexual abuser if we really want to be on the right side of history on this.

If he just said some things in anger and the pictures were doctored then he'd still be playing for the club. The reason people don't put them in possible scenarios are that they aren't serious scenarios.

 

[RedRocket08]

If he just said some things in anger and the pictures were doctored then he'd still be playing for the club. The reason people don't put them in possible scenarios are that they aren't serious scenarios.

OK so when CPS dropped charges and this no longer became a criminal matter, it was then left to the club (as his employer) to investigate further and determine their authenticity/context of the evidence right - and the club did investigate and didn’t find him guilty of having done what he was accused of. But going by the fans’ perspectives here (not mine), a large share of us (could be 50-50, could be more/less but still a large share) don’t accept the club’s position. Given the sensitivity of the topic, the club/HR/MG aren’t obliged to disclose more and revisit a painful topic - for these two individuals and the club, the matter is closed.

So then what? I guess we sell him. But if we sell him, I say give his transfer proceeds to charity - take a full measure instead of a half measure on this topic.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

Let’s take opinions and assumptions based on limited evidence out of it.

The facts are there was an audio and some photos posted on social media, which sounded and looked very bad on the face of it.

The ”entities” that have had access to much more information around it are (I) Mason and his partner, (ii) Manchester United and (iii) the CPS / Police

Based on that, the club concluded:

“Based on the evidence available to us, we have concluded that the material posted online did not provide a full picture and that Mason did not commit the offences in respect of which he was originally charged. That said, as Mason publicly acknowledges today, he has made mistakes which he is taking responsibility for.”

Mason and his partner have decided to stay together and have a child.

The CPS concluded that there wasn’t a prosecutable criminal offence.

You may make certain judgements based on those three entities' conclusions.

It is not clear what “mistakes” Mason made but, based on the above, the likelihood is that it fell short of criminal offences.

I think most people at this point believe that he should be allowed to continue his career as a footballer and put right those mistakes. My view is that, given the club has been instrumental in his development from a young age, our club should step up and be involved in that redemption, rather than offloading him to somebody else to do so. If he makes similar mistakes again, then he’s gone. If he doesn’t make it football wise then he'll be moved on for different reasons.

I can also understand other people’s viewpoint that they'd just rather him gone, and brush the issue under the carpet though, out of sight out of mind.

 

[sebsheep]

OK so when CPS dropped charges and this no longer became a criminal matter, it was then left to the club (as his employer) to investigate further and determine their authenticity/context of the evidence right - and the club did investigate and didn’t find him guilty of having done what he was accused of. But going by the fans’ perspectives here (not mine), a large share of us (could be 50-50, could be more/less but still a large share) don’t accept the club’s position. Given the sensitivity of the topic, the club/HR/MG aren’t obliged to disclose more and revisit a painful topic - for these two individuals and the club, the matter is closed.

So then what? I guess we sell him. But if we sell him, I say give his transfer proceeds to charity - take a full measure instead of a half measure on this topic.

The club should've had external investigators, there's a pretty obvious problem with them conducting an investigation where it benefits them to find that he hadn't done anything wrong.
We'd also do well not to forget how the club internally spoke about DV charities.

What do you think would be sensitive about something that apparently didn't happen?

 

[NotThatSoph]

Let’s take opinions and assumptions based on limited evidence out of it.

The facts are there was an audio and some photos posted on social media, which sounded and looked very bad on the face of it.

The ”entities” that have had access to much more information around it are (I) Mason and his partner, (ii) Manchester United and (iii) the CPS / Police

Based on that, the club concluded:

“Based on the evidence available to us, we have concluded that the material posted online did not provide a full picture and that Mason did not commit the offences in respect of which he was originally charged. That said, as Mason publicly acknowledges today, he has made mistakes which he is taking responsibility for.”

Mason and his partner have decided to stay together and have a child.

The CPS concluded that there wasn’t a prosecutable criminal offence.

You may make certain judgements based on those three entities' conclusions.

It is not clear what “mistakes” Mason made but, based on the above, the likelihood is that it fell short of criminal offences.

I think most people at this point believe that he should be allowed to continue his career as a footballer and put right those mistakes. My view is that, given the club has been instrumental in his development from a young age, our club should step up and be involved in that redemption, rather than offloading him to somebody else to do so. If he makes similar mistakes again, then he’s gone. If he doesn’t make it football wise then he'll be moved on for different reasons.

I can also understand other people’s viewpoint that they'd just rather him gone, and brush the issue under the carpet though, out of sight out of mind.

There is no reason to think the club has access to more information than the public, except Greenwood's explanation.

 

[RedRocket08]

The club should've had external investigators, there's a pretty obvious problem with them conducting an investigation where it benefits them to find that he hadn't done anything wrong.
We'd also do well not to forget how the club internally spoke about DV charities.

What do you think would be sensitive about something that apparently didn't happen?

Could not have happened, but it's still a sensitive topic given that this concerns two individuals' private lives - Maybe the two people involved didn't want even more scrutiny into their private lives? Which kind of answers your first point, maybe the two individuals involved (And not the club) didn't want the added scrutiny into their private lives that an external investigation would bring. The English tabloids can't stop harping on about Harry and Meghan to this day, and would milk this story for months (They still do with the Mason in Getafe / Mason to Real/Barca content) - Maybe the two individuals just wanted an end to the endless stories so that they can move on with their lives.

 

[TsuWave]

Unlike most in here I prefer to judge the evidence presented and then come to a reasonable conclusion from it, have you any evidence to back up this particular claim?

Also, according to the most recent market research (2023), United have up to about 650m followers worldwide. With a number that high, it’s certain that a very large swath of them live in Asia, Africa and other non-Europe continents. These are places where social norms are often quite different than they are in the UK, so one shouldn't be surprised to see that many in these regions would be amenable to seeing him return to United based purely on their interests in seeing United improve.

Greenwood got a hero’s welcome at Getafe. Training sessions full of adults and kids to watch and welcome him. Reportedly broke shirt sales records and they dubbed it “Greenwoodmania”

Posts made by Getafe fans have been posted in this very same thread and they love him.

Whatever points are being made above can be made without bringing “Asia, Africa and non-Europe continents” into it.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

There is no reason to think the club has access to more information than the public, except Greenwood's explanation.

It says that they gained access to evidence not in the public domain although they don't say what it was. They must have seen enough to allow them to make the conclusions that they did.

 

[NotThatSoph]

It says that they gained access to evidence not in the public domain. Of course they may be lying.

Yes, Greenwood's statement.

 

[RedRocket08]

Whatever points are being made above can be made without bringing “Asia, Africa and non-Europe continents” into it.

I do agree with this, this is not some cultural bias thing - Most people look down upon DV or sexual abuse, regardless of what side of the world they're from.

 

[sebsheep]

Could not have happened, but it's still a sensitive topic given that this concerns two individuals' private lives - Maybe the two people involved didn't want even more scrutiny into their private lives? Which kind of answers your first point, maybe the two individuals involved (And not the club) didn't want the added scrutiny into their private lives that an external investigation would bring. The English tabloids can't stop harping on about Harry and Meghan to this day, and would milk this story for months (They still do with the Mason in Getafe / Mason to Real/Barca content) - Maybe the two individuals just wanted an end to the endless stories so that they can move on with their lives.

That entire idea only works if everyone truly believed that him being allowed back into the team without anything more than "trust us" as an explanation would bring no scrutiny.
Reportings on the club's plan to bring him back go completely against that idea, as does logic.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

Yes, Greenwood's statement.

I don’t think they said what it was. I think you’re getting into speculation again.

 

[RedNome]

Greenwood got a hero’s welcome at Getafe. Training sessions full of adults and kids to watch and welcome him. Reportedly broke shirt sales records and they dubbed it “Greenwoodmania”

Posts made by Getafe fans have been posted in this very same thread and they love him.

Whatever points are being made above can be made without bringing into it.

Not sure why you quoted me, I wasn't the one who brought “Asia, Africa and non-Europe continents” into it.

 

[NotThatSoph]

I don’t think they said what it was. I think you’re getting into speculation again.

What I said is that we have no reason to think they have anything else. They said that they had something not in the public domain, and we know they have access to Greenwood's explanation, which is not in the public domain. You're speculating that they have even more.

 

[TsuWave]

Not sure why you quoted me, I wasn't the one who brought “Asia, Africa and non-Europe continents” into it.

I quoted you for context, as the post was made in response to yours. Hence “whatever points are being made” - I was merely quoting the exchange - no ill intent.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

What I said is that we have no reason to think they have anything else. They said that they had something not in the public domain, and we know they have access to Greenwood's explanation, which is not in the public domain. You're speculating that they have even more.

They could have had anything, we just don’t know, and I’m not willing to engage in baseless speculation. All I’m saying is that they had access to more than any of us and, whatever it was, it was enough for them to publicly make that statement.

 

[RedNome]

I quoted you for context, as the post was made in response to yours. Hence “whatever points are being made” - I was merely quoting the exchange - no ill intent.

Fair, was a pointless exchange I ended up in.

 

[sebsheep]

I don’t think they said what it was. I think you’re getting into speculation again.

You speculated in your own post about it...

 

[NotThatSoph]

They could have had anything, we just don’t know, and I’m not willing to engage in baseless speculation. All I’m saying is that they had access to more than any of us and, whatever it was, it was enough for them to publicly make that statement.

No, they couldn't have anything. For instance, they don't have the whole tape, they don't have a statement from the victim, they don't have anything from the victim's family, and they don't have anything from the criminal investigation.

We do know that they have an explanation from Greenwood. You said that the club had access to much more information than the public, but you don't know that and have no reason to believe that.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

You speculated in your own post about it...

No, I didn’t

 

[Raoul]

Greenwood got a hero’s welcome at Getafe. Training sessions full of adults and kids to watch and welcome him. Reportedly broke shirt sales records and they dubbed it “Greenwoodmania”

Posts made by Getafe fans have been posted in this very same thread and they love him.

Whatever points are being made above can be made without bringing “Asia, Africa and non-Europe continents” into it.

Or simply add Europe to the other three. My point was that most of this is largely contained within the UK.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

No, they couldn't have anything. For instance, they don't have the whole tape, they don't have a statement from the victim, they don't have anything from the victim's family, and they don't have anything from the criminal investigation.

We do know that they have an explanation from Greenwood. You said that the club had access to much more information than the public, but you don't know that and have no reason to believe that.

Again, this is speculation - or do you know all this for a fact?

 

[NotThatSoph]

Again, this is speculation - or do you know all this for a fact?

Yes, this is all known information.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

Yes, this is all known information.

Known how? Either way, it is not known exactly what extra evidence they had. The only certainty is that they had enough for them to publicly say “Mason did not commit the offences in respect of which he was originally charged”