His position is untenable IMO.
Why is Richard Arnold getting a free pass from the fans?
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Sounds like the Glazer style of having several outcomes available to choose on a whim.
I have the utmost confidence that this is the CEO to take us to the next level.
Richard Arnold has been a breath of fresh air after what came before. He’s not our friend he’s employed to do a job. He’s made an incredibly difficult decision. Well done for having the nuts to do the right thing. The fact that mason acknowledged he made mistakes says he did something wrong.
Think he will definitely leave (under new owners guaranteed) even if he doesn't step down. I think the way he's gone about making this decision has been ridiculous. It doesn't matter what choice would have been made, his position is certainly untenable. The statement that he's put out that the club feel the player hasn't commited the accused crime is wild. Clueless leadership at the club.
He and ETH should leave asap!
Why? I genuinely don’t understand this view point? What more should he have done?
White text needed.
Wait, why do people hate him now?
Well according to reliable journalists he made the decision to bring mg back and the club conducted detailed planning around this. This was obviously going to result in significant backlash, yet when this happened he quickly rowed back on a decision its taken months to reach. Doesn't exactly say much for his decision making capabilities
Shame it had to come to this for the fanbase to see the snake oil seller's true colors.
He explains all the events and their reasons fairly well in his statement. All seems reasonable.
I am confused as well.
Why? he clearly planned to go into this season with him in the squad. No proper manager would go into the season with only a 20 year old striker and injury prone Martial.
Is he getting a free pass?
Do we not take it at face value that a range of options were prepared? The flip side of that coin is he is incredibly prepared/thorough.
Crafton likely reported the information he was given but he didn’t necessarily get the whole story did he?
When domestic victims groups are being labelled as 'hostile' someone needs held to account
disgusting and damaging to our club
disgusting and damaging to our club
I very much doubt the club would feel they needed inform the women's team of their decision before announcing publicly were it the case they were planning on getting rid of Mason. I also doubt they would have developed detailed plans of the types of photos to be taken of Mason in training as part of an options assessment. It seems highly likely the athletics info came from a disgruntled employee
The open letter is horrendously cowardly. I am pleased with the decision but if Richard Arnold being a man in the position he is in does not realise that he can't sit on the fence then I seriously question his grasp on the situation.
I'm pleased to hear that the alleged victim will be offered continued support. I'd love to hear a little from the poster I spoke with who painted this as an impossibility if MG left the club.
I'd love to hear from those who were told numerous times that nothing of substance would be released with the clubs decision re the "new evidence" yet acted as though it would definitely happen as a way of defending certain views. Saying that they would obviously just say we need to wait longer for something that would explain why a recording threatening to rape a woman is palatable.
Anyway, the decision is ultimately the right one yet if Arnold believed MG is innocent then it shows a pathetic level of bowing to public pressure that is not suitable for his role in a company that is this size and so public facing. He is horrendously underqualified to make that assesment and no matter how long he stays I hope he makes no more public statements representint the club.
I'm pleased to hear that the alleged victim will be offered continued support. I'd love to hear a little from the poster I spoke with who painted this as an impossibility if MG left the club.
I'd love to hear from those who were told numerous times that nothing of substance would be released with the clubs decision re the "new evidence" yet acted as though it would definitely happen as a way of defending certain views. Saying that they would obviously just say we need to wait longer for something that would explain why a recording threatening to rape a woman is palatable.
Anyway, the decision is ultimately the right one yet if Arnold believed MG is innocent then it shows a pathetic level of bowing to public pressure that is not suitable for his role in a company that is this size and so public facing. He is horrendously underqualified to make that assesment and no matter how long he stays I hope he makes no more public statements representint the club.
I expect that that statement will have been pored over by any number of lawyers, surely the club’s and Greenwood’s. Maybe even hers. And what’s left is a statement so vague that it invites more criticism and questions. But I don’t envy whoever had to draft that.
I agree that it is an unenviable position but it was done in nearly the worst way possible.
There is only one right way to make that statement and I'm almost sure any solicitor would have informed them of such. It should have been -
"Following an internal investigation Manchester United and Mason Greenwood have decided to part company"
The fact he felt to say Greenwood is innocent is purely because he saw the press over the last few days and his own ego wanted to try and not look like a bad guy.
Anyway, right decision I just hope he doesn't do much more public facing stuff for the club. Attention back to getting the Glazers out for a decent owner.
Silly post. Ten Hag is the best manager we’ve had post Fergie. Added 17 points to a team in 6th took them to 3rd and two cup finals.
He was open to having MG back in the squad, I don’t think he was desperate for it.
What he did want was an experience goal scorer because we are desperately lacking, but again the club owners have let him down by not financing his requests.
In fairness I agree with your statement more than I do my own. The added qualifications were likely put in by someone trying to defend their own actions/reputation. This was not the time or the place to do that.
Yes but he lost a game and wasn't that great in another game. Everyone knows if you have a poor first 2 games of the season it's impossible to improve.
Yeah I didn't see you as disagreeing. Just adding more context to why they dealt with it so poorly. All good
We should sack them all.
fecking start over again like we seem to do every 3 years.
I'd start with not classifying sexual abuse charities as "hostile".
You know that was Arnold and not some lower dept reporting to him?
In any case they would likely be hostile to MG being reintegrated much like the public as they wouldn’t have the whole information/picture as we don’t.
It was a comment on this specific scenario not a general opinion. Don’t blow the details out of proportion/context.
If he hadn't said that though, the assumption would have been that the club thought he was guilty and were parting company for that reason.
Honestly don't think he could win.
This is the truth of the matter but folk have made up their minds one way or the other and will condemn him either way.
Took to the 21st August 2023 to make this decision on Greenwood. Sounded like he stayed in the pub after them fans left last year, writing that statement too. Hard to believe he's making decisions, Glazers need go and the circus must end.
So you're going to ignore the criminal investigation which precludes all else. And the fact that the club was open for a sale.
Fine if you have opinions like everyone else, but highly ignorant to say he's done nothing or took a long time to do something that was legally and confidentially appropriate as possible.
Just continues to show how complex and details such things are and careful and thorough processes must take place, which takes time...of which people don't care for.
The criminal case was dropped in early feb
If this was going to be the outcome it could have been announced sooner, the delay was because they were intending to bring him back but did a U-turn when there was a backlash. The fact Arnold caved so easily and wasn’t prepared for such a backlash shows how out of touch and incompetent the leadership is.
If they thought he had not committed any offence, wanted him to leave and find a new club they would have done it earlier to help him find one, not 10 days before the window shuts.
At least they reached the right decision in the end though.
If they thought he had not committed any offence, wanted him to leave and find a new club they would have done it earlier to help him find one, not 10 days before the window shuts.
At least they reached the right decision in the end though.
Last edited:
He was damned whatever he did in the Greenwood situation wasn't he.
My hope is that the contract isn't terminated but is sold to at least recoup some money for the good of the club
My hope is that the contract isn't terminated but is sold to at least recoup some money for the good of the club
If he believes him to be innocent then the decision shouldn't have been taken to part company.
Maybe, unless the supposed proof wasn't suitable to publicly show, in which case the media storm wouldn't go away.
It appears the club were heavily considering keeping him. I don't like the idea they were doing so if they thought he was guilty, and thats something no one outside of a select few will ever know for certain.
Why Ten Hag?
He had no option to let him go. Just check Athletic article where how they are mentioning that it was their campaign with few MP’s “concern” made this U turn possible. There was no way any decision would have been taken without any repercussion and this is just selecting the best among the bad ones