Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

Status
Not open for further replies.
Redlambs said:
So basically you think she lied and he is protecting her.
Click to expand...

I didn't get that from the post.

I kind of agree with the general gist.

For example, if United are told by Greenwood that the tape was part of some sex game (the "alternative explanation" mentioned by Arnold), and that they can't hear the whole tape out of respect for the privacy of Greenwood and his partner's sex lives (the claim in Arnold's letter that they "cannot access certain evidence for reasons they respect"), and Greenwood's partner, through her mother, refuses to refute any of these claims, I imagine this puts the club in a tough spot.

I thought this wording was very peculiar: "While we were unable to access certain evidence for reasons we respect, the evidence we did collate led us to conclude that Mason did not commit the acts he was charged with." Why emphasize that you did not have access to certain evidence?
 
Murder on Zidane's Floor said:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/mason-greenwood-cps-discontinuance-charges

New material is being interpreted by his defenders as something it's not. People claiming it's a longer recording, it doesn't say anything of the sort, just new material.
Click to expand...

Go read Arnold's statement, he says there was a longer recording and more context, he says she was asking for the case to be dropped in April 22 and that the club was taking into the among the wishes of her family.. Not saying he's innocent or guilty, but I dont think any parents or family of the a DA or SA would wish for him to come back, even if their child is stuck with her abuser.
 
OverratedOpinion said:
The fact that domestic abuse victims frequently struggle to completely leave and rekindle relationships with their abusers does not make abuse morally acceptable.

I am not sure how many more times this needs to be said.
Click to expand...
But he should be allowed to play for less moral clubs? Or not play at all?
 
It's a relief for many reasons.

Even if I wanted him to stay, I truly doubt it would have gone well at all. Massive distraction for the whole club, massive pressure on him from fans and media and after being out of the game for 18 months.

Likely scenario is he wouldn't have been worth bringing back anyway.
 
Revan said:
Speculation but I think it is likely that he was abusive towards her, or they were mutually abusive (there was something along these lines in some small forums before the incident happened).
Click to expand...

Yeah, there were apparently loads of posts and it was well known how mutually toxic the relationship was. I think the United statement intimates that.

Here are a couple of the forum posts. I've edited out the girl invoved's name:

1

2

There were 15 screenshots on Reddit. Orla Sloan, the girl they mention a few times, was the girl who was recently in court for stalking Mason Mount.
 
Some real whoppers out there coming out of the woodworks in some of my United group chats :rolleyes:
 
OverratedOpinion said:
The fact that domestic abuse victims frequently struggle to completely leave and rekindle relationships with their abusers does not make abuse morally acceptable.

I am not sure how many more times this needs to be said.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it's morally acceptable .
I'm saying that psychological and other help could have been given to Mason/partner/families to study if it was possible to reintegrate him back into the United family.
 
DevilRed said:
Knowing our club and the love for keeping the "value of our assets", a loan seems likely.

Even if they wanted to sell, our incompetency probably wouldn't allow us to do so in less than two weeks.

Entire club is filled with dithering cnuts for decision makers.
Click to expand...
I see people saying he's been released. Is that confirmed? The statements were all pretty vague regarding that part.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Yeah if we really believed he was innocent and on the path of redemption then we shouldn’t have let him go. Send him out on loan, follow his progress and ensure that he’s a new and reformed man before taking him back. On the other hand if he’s committed those heinous acts and is the scumbag we all thought he was, then make it clear and send him packing.

The way it comes across, it’s hard to know what our investigation entailed but on face value it appears as though the decision is purely based on the backlash which is typical of us - ameteurish.
Click to expand...

While I believe it is the right decision to let him go, for a number of reasons, I think the club's handlng of all this has been cowardly and asinine. It's embarrassing.
 
Murder on Zidane's Floor said:
When I read bolded passages like this, I understand how people can believe in the most batshit and incredible things. Brexit, Trump, QAnon etc.

How people can literally defend the indefensible, it's sort of weirdly fascinating and horrible.
Click to expand...
I explicitly said these weren't my opinions, but speculations I've seen thrown up to cast doubt on the perceived sequence of events within the audio.

Withnail said:
This is about whether he should play for Man United again though. It's about our opinion. We aren't making a legal ruling. I was drawing a parallel as on the balance of probabilities I've made a decision on what I believe happened. My opinion is never going be legally binding so the burden of proof required in a court of law doesn't come into it.
Click to expand...
The problem is that your (or more importantly, collective society's) judgement is far more likely to be based on incomplete knowledge, thus highly subjective and flawed. However, its weight still can still bring real punishments for the accused - e.g. ending Greenwood's career - hence its danger.
 
Got to say that seeing the amount of upset or sad or angry reactions online is...an eye-opener.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I didn't get that from the post.

I kind of agree with the general gist.

For example, if United are told by Greenwood that the tape was part of some sex game (the "alternative explanation" mentioned by Arnold), and that they can't hear the whole tape out of respect for the privacy of Greenwood and his partner's sex lives (the claim in Arnold's letter that they "cannot access certain evidence for reasons they respect"), and Greenwood's partner, through her mother, refuses to refute any of these claims, I imagine this puts the club in a tough spot.
Click to expand...

It does, but that then forgets the fact she actually made a video statement the day after she accused him publicly.

The gist is right, and I wasn't attacking Pexbo at all as I've said it myself repeatedly. That the only other thing that explains those pictures and audio is that there is a more innocent side and she lied about it. I personally don't believe that, but it's the only alternative all the same.
 
Howl said:
I see people saying he's been released. Is that confirmed? The statements were all pretty vague regarding that part.
Click to expand...
No, the club said they will fully support him and his family to get his career back on track, just not here because of the harsh spotlight of United.
 
Cassidy said:
Because its wrong
United were not forced to do anything, they just chose to
Click to expand...

They had made a video explaining his return, after being satisfied with a 6 month investigation showing his innocence. They were forced into retraction by social media
 
Richard Arnold: "While we were unable to access certain evidence for reasons we respect, the evidence we did collate led us to conclude that Mason did not commit the acts he was charged with."

I wonder what the club would have done if they had concluded he did commit the acts he was charged with.
 
christinaa said:
I'm not saying it's morally acceptable .
I'm saying that psychological and other help could have been given to Mason/partner/families to study if it was possible to reintegrate him back into the United family.
Click to expand...

Do we have zero standards? What if a bang average youth player goes and shoots someone tomorrow? Do we say "they could get counselling that will heal them and stop them from shooting someone again"?

What is the level? Do you accept that we have a level and that threatening to rape women is a reasonable level for us to say we don't accept it?
 
Tender Teacher said:
I explicitly said these weren't my opinions, but speculations I've seen thrown up to cast doubt on the perceived sequence of events within the audio.


The problem is that your (or more importantly, collective society's) judgement is far more likely to be based on incomplete knowledge, thus highly subjective and flawed. However, its weight still can still bring real punishments for the accused - e.g. ending Greenwood's career - hence its danger.
Click to expand...

You said "in this thread".

Please quote the posts that used that sleepy excuse.
 
So it's MORALLY OKAY for him to play with any other club - just not at United ?!
 
mu4c_20le said:
No, the club said they will fully support him and his family to get his career back on track, just not here because of the harsh spotlight of United.
Click to expand...
So most likely a loan then? That's the way I read it but see a lot of comments about him being released.
 
Hammondo said:
Yes 100 percent they would want that, instead of a life of being called a rapist and whatever abuse comes with it, finishing his career at 21, and I don't want to think about the things that will be said to that child as it grows up.

There is no version of this that is better by not public explaining or sharing evidence.

You are just putting your head in the sand because you want to.
Click to expand...

You’re a very emotive individual that jumps to assumptions and conclusion and posts as if they’re universal truth.

My post includes “too many unknown or variables” yet your conclusion was “you’re just putting your head in the sand because you want to”. It’s not really an intelligent way of conversing.

The CPS dropped the charges and cited the withdrawal of key witnesses as well as new evidence. The club followed up by stating they don’t believe him to be guilty based on evidence not in the public domain.

Based of those things - and the fact that under legislation the alleged victim has a right for anonymity - I speculated that it might not be straight forward to publish whatever evidence was used for the club to come that that conclusion. I then presented a potential scenario in which said evidence could compromise her right for anonymity/her well-being in general and asked if we can say for sure that’s something he’d want for the mother of his kid and/or that their families would want - as again the club said they worked closely with these parties.

You said “yes” - as seemingly in your eyes - saving your career in a similar situation would take precedent over terminating the relationship with United and attempting to resuscitate your career elsewhere - OK, I get that. It doesn’t mean it’s universal truth for everyone. Again, too many unknowns and variables
 
Tender Teacher said:
I explicitly said these weren't my opinions, but speculations I've seen thrown up to cast doubt on the perceived sequence of events within the audio.


The problem is that your (or more importantly, collective society's) judgement is far more likely to be based on incomplete knowledge, thus highly subjective and flawed. However, its weight still can still bring real punishments for the accused - e.g. ending Greenwood's career - hence its danger.
Click to expand...

The club should have gotten rid ages ago imo. The tape is enough to have said he brought the club into disrepute. They deferred judgment, most likely because he was talented and they took a gamble he may have been acquitted and they'd be able to bring him back. The case falling apart and public opinion has put and end to that but he's not been convicted and his career hasn't ended. He is still a millionaire. He's just not going to play for Man United again.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
I didn't get that from the post.

I kind of agree with the general gist.

For example, if United are told by Greenwood that the tape was part of some sex game (the "alternative explanation" mentioned by Arnold), and that they can't hear the whole tape out of respect for the privacy of Greenwood and his partner's sex lives (the claim in Arnold's letter that they "cannot access certain evidence for reasons they respect"), and Greenwood's partner, through her mother, refuses to refute any of these claims, I imagine this puts the club in a tough spot.

I thought this wording was very peculiar: "While we were unable to access certain evidence for reasons we respect, the evidence we did collate led us to conclude that Mason did not commit the acts he was charged with." Why emphasize that you did not have access to certain evidence?
Click to expand...
While that is a possible scenario, I think it is very unlikely.

Let’s be real, money and fame matters. By doing so, Greenwood had everything to gain, worth the downside that his girlfriend, would be abused online for a week or so (is she even online nowadays). He would have got back his United spot, and overall his career would probably have gotten over 100m.

So I think this scenario is just extremely unlikely to be true.
 
christinaa said:
Still, the whole situation was mishandled by the top echelon at United.
First they said one thing and when some people came out protesting they bowed their head -weaklings!
Click to expand...
I agree they unsurprisingly handled it all poorly, but I also think it's the right decision to cut him from our club.
 
Spark said:
As others have stated, if he was a shit player in the reserves, it would be simple for the club to fire him and the supporters to turn their backs on him. When it comes to online arguments between people, the truth is that football doesn't really mirror normal day to day standards. At the end of the day, you're talking about people for whom supporting United means weekends ruined when we lose 2-0 to Spurs and want United to sign Mbappe etc, get bought by Qatar. Ultimately, it bears as much semblance to Football Manager as real life, so it becomes difficult to accept the fact that a player who many believed would be United's greatest of his generation has had his career ended because he is a total scumbag.
Click to expand...
If it was Messi he'd be back in the lineup by the end of the week
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
The thing is that this case is not 'mere suspicion.'

Greenwood is on tape saying incredibly terrible things. The tape is damning in itself. Neither United nor Greenwood have denied that he said those things, and they have not offered an alternative explanation of the tape. They have merely asserted that the alternative explanation exists, and is good.

Imagine if the tape wasn't of Greenwood saying those things. Instead, it was a tape of Mason Mount saying that all foreigners should be kicked out of England. That England should be white. Down with [insert racial expletive here].

Would you accept the club saying "Mount has offered us an alternative explanation of the contents of the tape and we are satisfied with it. But it's all very complicated"? Would you start thinking "well maybe Mason Mount is a big Eric Clapton fan and he was just doing an impression of a little known mid-concert rant from a 1976 bootleg?"
Click to expand...
As I said before, there could be any number of potential explanations for the wider context of the voice recording. It could be that the true explanation is deeply personal for the alleged victim and/or Greenwood thus would be harmful to them if made public.
 
mu4c_20le said:
No, the club said they will fully support him and his family to get his career back on track, just not here because of the harsh spotlight of United.
Click to expand...

Seems from the wording in both the Club Statement and Richard Arnold's Open Letter is that they are keeping the door open for a possible future return (however unlikely and ill-advised).

This is such a messy situation, and for all those who say the club have handled this horribly - I agree. At the same time, I genuinely don't see how they could have handled it in a way that wouldn't be described as "horrible", apart from just letting the player go in the first place (though I'm uncomfortable with such black-and-white judgement on short notice in a world full of shades of grey).
 
Howl said:
So most likely a loan then? That's the way I read it but see a lot of comments about him being released.
Click to expand...
I can see a release being possible but only if the interested club (Turkey?) cannot afford him and we genuinely want to help him. Otherwise, we aren't just sacking him like some have suggested. Loan could be possible, but would probably be seen as another U turn.
 
Spaghetti said:
They had made a video explaining his return, after being satisfied with a 6 month investigation showing his innocence. They were forced into retraction by social media
Click to expand...

Again they were not FORCED into anything.
 
Redlambs said:
So basically you think she lied and he is protecting her.

I mean, it's the only other option than him being guilty. But then he does speak to have done things wrong in this relationship, and that means she did it out of anger.
Click to expand...
Eh? That’s not what I said at all.
 
mu4c_20le said:
But he should be allowed to play for less moral clubs? Or not play at all?
Click to expand...

I believe that he should be allowed to seek employment anywhere he chooses. I personally hope my club doesn't give someone who's done what we have seen and heard a giant platform but anyone else doing so is not my business. I hope he seeks help to change his behaviour.
 
The correct decision has been made but this whole thing has been handled rather badly. There was no way he was ever going to come back.
 
SoCross said:
Don’t be so pedantic mate, you know what I meant. Not sure if you recall yourself at 21, that’s still young (unless you’re Jlingz).
Click to expand...


Not sure what these types of posts are getting at, that's all. At 21 any man such know that beating your partner to a pulp, and threatening r*pe is irredeemably wrong.
 
Martial'sEmergingSmile said:
Yeah, there were apparently loads of posts and it was well known how mutually toxic the relationship was. I think the United statement intimates that.

Here are a couple of the forum posts. I've edited out the girl invoved's name:

1

2

There were 15 screenshots on Reddit. Orla Sloan, the girl they mention a few times, was the girl who was recently in court for stalking Mason Mount.
Click to expand...
Yep, those posts is what I was talking about. They are very wild.

So my best guess is that Greenwood’s defense that United found out would have been among the lines of ‘I actually did not rape her, but threatened to rape her and hit her (or verbally abused her), but so did she to me’. Which likely would not have saved his United career (especially after the backlash) while just making their lives miserable, assuming that they have found some peace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.