Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Athletic Masterclass here

Had the club skewered, external pressure beat internal desire .

The club have bowed to pressure and they are removing our best talent from the academy in the recent years who will be our best forward immediately.

I am fully convinced that if this was any other top team in the world, they would have never removed their best talent when it was said that all charges were cleared.

Most rival fans have been roaring for Greenwood to be removed not because he has done bad thing but simply because they don't want to see our best player return to play for us.

I'd call it morality and ethics but the club has shown none by allowing this to drag on so long. The only reason Greenwood won't come back when the manager and the board wanted him back is because it will hit the Glazers pocket hard. I am 99% sure that if Sir Alex Ferguson was still our coach and making the decisions, Greenwood would already be playing for us and the case would have already been forgotten.

From a footballing perspective it’s a huge loss but morally it’s a huge win. I don't support what Greenwood did and I think it was too extreme on his part. But the thought of letting go one of the best talent the academy has produced in recent years pisses me of. This boy was something special (In Football) and he is one of our own from 7 year old .




.
 
Spaghetti said:
Everyone can see things and hear things and interpret them in a different way. This is not an Orwellian society.

United’s long investigation says that he did not do what he was accused of. We are all speculating. Just because you don’t like the possible justifications doesn’t mean that my interpretations are the only ones invented, not does it mean they are less valid.
Click to expand...

Your interpretation is an invention, my reaction to the audio is not an invention, it's a reaction to their interaction. Even if my reaction happened to be misguided, it still wouldn't be an invention while your interpretation and assumptions are inventions because you are inventing an alternative that is supported by nothing and no one
 
This would been a different story if MG was not a talent. People here who are defending him would not bat an eye lid if this was done by someone who was in our reserves and not so good at football.

It is human nature. If an unknown person dies of drug overdose - he probably had it coming. If a celebrity dies then the whole world mourns.
 
CantonaManc said:
Most rival fans have been roaring for Greenwood to be removed not because he has done bad thing but simply because they don't want to see our best player return to play for us.
Click to expand...
Greenwood isn't even close to being United's best player.
 
Velvet Revolver said:
This would been a different story if MG was not a talent. People here who are defending him would not bat an eye lid if this was done by someone who was in our reserves and not so good at football.

It is human nature. If an unknown person dies of drug overdose - he probably had it coming. If a celebrity dies then the whole world mourns.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It’s the only reason people have time for him, because he kicked a football well.
 
Spaghetti said:
If it was my daughter.

1- if I believed it was something of nothing, I’d support them both.

2- if I believed he had mistreated her, I’d cut his balls off and feed them to him.
Click to expand...
So, you'd have to go option 2. Since WE KNOW that he mistreated her. That's not up for any kind of debate. We heard it. It wasn't role play, unless of course the argument is that they were role playing entitled little shit? Which would be one of the weirder kinks. But then, how do explain the pictures? The bloody face, the bruises. Role play? Come on, dude.

This is yet another case of a cnut who got too much too soon, thought he could get away with anything and everything. We all grew up with these cnuts. There was always one who thought he was hot shit just because he could kick a ball. There's nothing new here. It's not cancel culture, or racism, or "wanting him to be guilty". He is guilty. It's just a fact. You wanna know what people do when they get accused of shit like that? They should from the roof tops that they are innocent. It happened to me, and if I had evidence that it didn't happen I would have had that shit in as many places as I possibly could. The idea that he's happy to go through the rest of life with that label if there was evidence to contrary is just all kinds of dumb. No one would wear that jacket that didn't have to. No one.

You backed the wrong horse. Time to own it and move on.
 
Just fyi for people, it's an absolute reported fact he broke his bail conditions multiple times to contact and visit the victim over a period of months during the investigation, even being re-arrested in her company, bought her designer clothes etc to the point the Judge had to question why the Police were ignoring the fact he'd done this.

Then she got pregnant and the key witness didn't want to testify anymore, classic signs of abuser and victim.
 
JPRouve said:
Your interpretation is an invention, my reaction to the audio is not an invention, it's a reaction to their interaction. Even if my reaction happened to be misguided, it still wouldn't be an invention while your interpretation and assumptions are inventions because you are inventing an alternative that is supported by nothing and no one
Click to expand...

No. We are both inventing our interpretations to the same audio.

There are 0 people who were involved who said it was actually what the accusations were (also your interpretation).

None of the posts on here are “the truth”; we don’t know the truth.

You don’t seem to know this yet, but your opinion and interpretations are not (necessarily) the truth.
 
Spaghetti said:
Just because you don’t like the possible justifications doesn’t mean that my interpretations are the only ones invented, not does it mean they are less valid.
Click to expand...

They are less valid. Simply because there's less evidence in their favor and they are less plausible.

Do you think my interpretation that the tape was recorded by voice-mimicking creatures from the Amazon jungle is equally as valid as yours?
 
CantonaManc said:
Most rival fans have been roaring for Greenwood to be removed not because he has done bad thing but simply because they don't want to see our best player return to play for us.
Click to expand...

Silly take. Most rival fans don't want him to play football because he is a prick. They wouldn't accept him in their club either.

Also, let's not be completely OTT here - he was an OK player. Nothing amazing.
 
Womp said:
He was suspended with pay and his football career isn't being destroyed, it's just not going to continue at United?
Click to expand...
So you think he had not paid a high price yet before he left United yesterday?
 
JulesWinnfield said:
No. Its the facts. And the judge even questioned why the police were ignoring him repeatedly breaching bail conditions:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/mason-greenwood-bail-police-ignored-29122334
Click to expand...
My apologies, I haven't followed the case that closely, and certainly not in the printed media.
Reading the other links the CPS state that the prosecution was dropped because of new evidence that would have meant a conviction was unlikely. They also say that even though there is a lot of public and media attention to the case they are not going to elaborate.
Which leave us all in the dark, but goes some way to protect the parties involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rood
MoskvaRed said:
Arnold is an accountant, not a criminal barrister conducting cross-examination. Also, it’s in the club’s interest to try to “clear” him so they can move him on more easily.
Click to expand...

Arnold is indeed not a professional in Law, but he/the club has army of law professionals who can offer advice and support the investigation on the matter, and be able to, to some extent, tell Arnold if Mason did or did not commit the acts he is accused of, based on evidence the public is not privy to.
 
Sky1981 said:
Because they can't. The legal and moral implications of it does not fit a football club.

They can't say "We've looked at the additional evidence and found him Guilty"

That'll create a responsibility to report them to the police (i think), nor can they say "He's not guilty" because that too means they withheld an evidence that can clear their star player of any false accusation.

My guess is MU investigations is just a 3 man panel asking MG what really happened.

I don't believe for once MG have the evidence that could clear his name and refusing to come up with it

And with all this, saying the wrong thing could lead to lawsuit, even if its the right thing to do. Saying MG was guilty has a very big burden of proof coming from his Employer it's easy to sued
Click to expand...

Again, they didnt need to say either way what the conclusion of the internal investigation is. They can just say "We have decided its best for Greenwood to leave the club and his contract is terminated immediately".
 
Norman Brownbutter said:
So, you'd have to go option 2. Since WE KNOW that he mistreated her. That's not up for any kind of debate. We heard it. It wasn't role play, unless of course the argument is that they were role playing entitled little shit? Which would be one of the weirder kinks. But then, how do explain the pictures? The bloody face, the bruises. Role play? Come on, dude.

This is yet another case of a cnut who got too much too soon, thought he could get away with anything and everything. We all grew up with these cnuts. There was always one who thought he was hot shit just because he could kick a ball. There's nothing new here. It's not cancel culture, or racism, or "wanting him to be guilty". He is guilty. It's just a fact. You wanna know what people do when they get accused of shit like that? They should from the roof tops that they are innocent. It happened to me, and if I had evidence that it didn't happen I would have had that shit in as many places as I possibly could. The idea that he's happy to go through the rest of life with that label if there was evidence to contrary is just all kinds of dumb. No one would wear that jacket that didn't have to. No one.

You backed the wrong horse. Time to own it and move on.
Click to expand...

You have your mind made up. There’s little point offering explanations as it will just wind you up.

I’m fine with open-minded discussion about this, and I’m unsure whether he is guilty or not. I am interested in the case and would like to read more opinions and get more information before deciding.
 
Reapersoul20 said:
Silly take. Most rival fans don't want him to play football because he is a prick. They wouldn't accept him in their club either.

Also, let's not be completely OTT here - he was an OK player. Nothing amazing.
Click to expand...

Everyone sees things in their own way. In my eyes it is exactly that and no one can dissuade me from this.
 
Reapersoul20 said:
Silly take. Most rival fans don't want him to play football because he is a prick. They wouldn't accept him in their club either.

Also, let's not be completely OTT here - he was an OK player. Nothing amazing.
Click to expand...

Disagree with that. There was never this hard on for the Jon Flanagan case, because he was shit.
 
Spaghetti said:
No. We are both inventing our interpretations to the same audio.

There are 0 people who were involved who said it was actually what the accusations were (also your interpretation).

None of the posts on here are “the truth”; we don’t know the truth.

You don’t seem to know this yet, but your opinion and interpretations are not (necessarily) the truth.
Click to expand...

Again my reaction to literal words from Greenwood isn't an invention from me. You trying to contextualise those words without any elements to back it is an invention because you added things that weren't in the audio and haven't been stated by any of the parties.

It shouldn't be that difficult to understand and I'm pretty sure that you know it.
 
Ekeke said:
Again, they didnt need to say either way what the conclusion of the internal investigation is. They can just say "We have decided its best for Greenwood to leave the club and his contract is terminated immediately".
Click to expand...

They could, and I agree the whole wording backfired.

But not knowing the whole deal with MG legal team, it could be that they're trying to help the lad a little by wording it nicer. Could have been made a requirement to MG agreeing to the termination and refrain from future suing United.

What I strongly believe is that United have no extra evidence whatsoever, just word salad
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
They are less valid. Simply because there's less evidence in their favor and they are less plausible.

Do you think my interpretation that the tape was recorded by voice-mimicking creatures from the Amazon jungle is equally as valid as yours?
Click to expand...

Everyone who has inside information says that the “are not what he was accused of”. The people involved, their parents, the police, Man United. I think we are entitled to think outside the box a bit.
 
BootsyCollins said:
I cant grasp how many people who actually think like this.
I am putting it down to ignorance just to save myself from going mad.

Have you ever spoken to someone who has been abused? Its not just to leave, many stays put. That does NOT means they are a willing victim or the abuse not taking place.

So no, its not "simple mate". Its actually very complex.
Click to expand...

Whilst we all abhor domestic violence we must remember that this case involves 2 teenagers, at the time, who were toxic for each other and immature to understand some of the complexities around domestic violence. So l guess that's why the club talked of duty of care to Mason because he is still.a kids who is still growing up and need guidance which l hope his next club will provide him.with
 
Spaghetti said:
Flanagan was filmed pushing and kicking his girlfriend in public. But he wasn’t a fantastic United player so we got less drama.
Click to expand...

His talent isn’t important, him playing for us is as we’re always in the news and getting attention. This story is massively mainstream, everyone knows about it. Flanagan wasn’t, should have been.
 
JPRouve said:
Your interpretation is an invention, my reaction to the audio is not an invention, it's a reaction to their interaction. Even if my reaction happened to be misguided, it still wouldn't be an invention while your interpretation and assumptions are inventions because you are inventing an alternative that is supported by nothing and no one
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
Judas said:
His talent isn’t important, him playing for us is as we’re always in the news and getting attention. This story is massively mainstream, everyone knows about it. Flanagan wasn’t, should have been.
Click to expand...

It shouldn’t be, but it is. If it had been a lesser quality player, there would never have been the uproar from opposition fans.
 
Bastian said:
@Wibble

Can the Caf sentiment not be polled though?
Click to expand...

Most of the options you put are irrelevant given the club statement thought. The only 3 possibilities seem to be.

a) pay up his contract now
b) loan him with view to selling him later (or sit him on gardening leave until his contract expires if we can't find a loan club)
c) sell him now (or sit him on gardening leave until his contract expires if we can't find a buying club)

And does anyone really care that much which one it is?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.