Mason Greenwood

[Dr. Gonzo]

16 minutes ago, Redcanuck said:

the club are more concerned with any likely backlash than the well being of a player who has been with the club since he was 7. 

That's very obviously what they've shown with their statement here today. They've said despite the evidence the public has seen, they believe Greenwood insisting he's not done what he's been accused of - but also know that the evidence is damning in the public eye so they've got to be rid of him.

Tbh, sticking by him and pretending there was nothing wrong with what we'd seen and heard he had done would have been 100% morally reprehensible. He wasn't convicted in court, but the evidence is damning. It's worse than with Partey, Mendy or Ronaldo because it came out very publicly. And it's more than descriptions of the allegation, it was audio evidence of rape and photographs of domestic abuse made public by the victim.

They've managed to do the next most morally reprehensible thing of making it clear they're only not standing by him because of the backlash they'd brought upon himself, but making public statements in support of the player.

[Stan]

46 minutes ago, Redcanuck said:

I don't understand this decision,  makes no sense to me.

In United's statement they say 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.  

If the club feel he didn't commit the offences, then they should stand by him.  If what was posted online did not provide the full picture, then give us the full picture, so we can fully understand this decision.

 Otherwise, it looks like Greenwood has been convicted in the court of public opinion and the club are more concerned with any likely backlash than the well being of a player who has been with the club since he was 7. 

Legally, they probably are unable to do so. They need to protect the right to anonymity that the victim has requested. 

What I find annoying and angering, actually, is both the club and Arnold say he was 'cleared of all charges'. This is absolutely not the case. The accused dropped the charges. There is a distinct difference. 

[Redcanuck]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

That's very obviously what they've shown with their statement here today. They've said despite the evidence the public has seen, they believe Greenwood insisting he's not done what he's been accused of - but also know that the evidence is damning in the public eye so they've got to be rid of him.

Tbh, sticking by him and pretending there was nothing wrong with what we'd seen and heard he had done would have been 100% morally reprehensible. He wasn't convicted in court, but the evidence is damning. It's worse than with Partey, Mendy or Ronaldo because it came out very publicly. And it's more than descriptions of the allegation, it was audio evidence of rape and photographs of domestic abuse made public by the victim.

They've managed to do the next most morally reprehensible thing of making it clear they're only not standing by him because of the backlash they'd brought upon himself, but making public statements in support of the player.

Let's be clear on one thing, if the pictures and the tape are real and an actual reflection on what happened, then Greenwood should never play for United again.   But I can't be sure if they are or not because we haven't been given all the facts.

One of the reasons the CPS drops the case is because of new evidence coming to light, but they don't tell you what that new evidence is.  The club in their statement seem to be saying that they believe he has been falsely accused and the photos and the audio clip are not the whole story.  Richard Arnold has said that United were provided with alternative explanations for the audio recording which was a short excerpt from a much longer recording and for the images posted online. But he doesn't provide the information he was given.    ( I understand there are legal reasons why, by why mention them) .

The main reason for United releasing him looks to be that they are trying to protect the brand,  and perhaps to protect Greenwood from the abuse he would get in England. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

2 minutes ago, Redcanuck said:

Let's be clear on one thing, if the pictures and the tape are real and an actual reflection on what happened, then Greenwood should never play for United again.   But I can't be sure if they are or not because we haven't been given all the facts.

One of the reasons the CPS drops the case is because of new evidence coming to light, but they don't tell you want that new evidence is.  The club in their statement seem to be saying that they believe he has been falsely accused and the photos and the audio clip are not the whole story.  Richard Arnold has said that United were provided with alternative explanations for the audio recording which was a short excerpt from a much longer recording and for the images posted online. But he doesn't provide the information he was given.    ( I understand there are legal reasons why, by why mention them) .

The main reason for United releasing him looks to be that they are trying to protect the brand,  and perhaps to protect Greenwood from the abuse he would get in England. 

Whatever that evidence might be, it must really be something to counteract the evidence against him. While it may not have been enough to convict him in court - it's certainly enough to condemn the fucker.

 

I think trying to walk the PR line while also trying to protect the player is probably so they don't get sued by Greenwood more than anything, but it all looks bad tbh. The player forced them into a bad PR spot here with his conduct. They can't really release him from his contract without his consent until he'd been convicted - so obviously the charges being dropped threw a wrench in the easy and obvious solution for United.

I think they've done the right thing by saying he'll never play for United again, but I do think their statements backing Greenwood aren't going to make them look any better and are going to have the club leadership getting some flak. It's a weird balancing act they've tried to make, but it's also probably the only way they could get Greenwood to agree to fuck off without him taking them to court.

[Redcanuck]

50 minutes ago, Stan said:

Legally, they probably are unable to do so. They need to protect the right to anonymity that the victim has requested. 

What I find annoying and angering, actually, is both the club and Arnold say he was 'cleared of all charges'. This is absolutely not the case. The accused dropped the charges. There is a distinct difference. 

I don't think Arnold said he was cleared of all charges, just that all charges were dropped.  I maybe wrong though , just haven't been able to find that in his statement 

[Stan]

5 minutes ago, Redcanuck said:

I don't think Arnold said he was cleared of all charges, just that all charges were dropped.  I maybe wrong though , just haven't been able to find that in his statement 

I feel like I definitely read it on the statements! Part of me now thinks the statements have been hastily amended! 

[OrangeKhrush]

i wonder who picks him up

[Redcanuck]

7 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Whatever that evidence might be, it must really be something to counteract the evidence against him. While it may not have been enough to convict him in court - it's certainly enough to condemn the fucker.

 

I think trying to walk the PR line while also trying to protect the player is probably so they don't get sued by Greenwood more than anything, but it all looks bad tbh. The player forced them into a bad PR spot here with his conduct. They can't really release him from his contract without his consent until he'd been convicted - so obviously the charges being dropped threw a wrench in the easy and obvious solution for United.

I think they've done the right thing by saying he'll never play for United again, but I do think their statements backing Greenwood aren't going to make them look any better and are going to have the club leadership getting some flak. It's a weird balancing act they've tried to make, but it's also probably the only way they could get Greenwood to agree to fuck off without him taking them to court.

We are never going to hear the full recording and what is on it and find out whether it changes our prespective of what happened or not.  However, according to Richard Arnold it's a long recording and there is something on it that caused him to believe that the short clip we heard is not a true reflection on what was going on.  That does seem hard to believe but he does seem to believe it.

If United wanted to get rid of him and this is just a PR exercise to stop him suing them from ending his contract,  why wouldn't they just agree to pay out the rest of his contract and wish him luck with his future endeavors.   Would of cost them less in £'s than the fallout cost will be for how bad United handled this situation.

[Stan]

4 minutes ago, Redcanuck said:

If United wanted to get rid of him and this is just a PR exercise to stop him suing them from ending his contract,  why wouldn't they just agree to pay out the rest of his contract

Would that not require Greenwood to agree to that?

[Redcanuck]

3 minutes ago, Stan said:

Would that not require Greenwood to agree to that?

Legally I am not sure.   Their not really violating his contract if they pay him out in full.

[MUFC]

35 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

i wonder who picks him up

Liverpool or City.

[Devil]

Nobody is going to buy him after two years out and a video recording of domestic abuse and sexual abuse in circulation. Even it he went somewhere on a free there is a good chance he will be hounded out and club sponsors threatening to pull out of deals. This crazy notion he's going to rebuild his career is nothing but fantasy.

[Tommy]

He's be a perfect fit for Saudi Arabia. 

[6666]

An opportunity that comes with a lot of baggage. A desperate team will take advantage of that opportunity. Everton. Or it might be somewhere random.

[Dr. Gonzo]

39 minutes ago, 6666 said:

An opportunity that comes with a lot of baggage. A desperate team will take advantage of that opportunity. Everton. Or it might be somewhere random.

I'm not sure any team that he'd want to take a chance on him, even if they're truly desperate, would be desperate enough to tie themselves to the appearance of being okay with rape and domestic violence. It very much seems like United were hoping that there wouldn't be any sort of pushback on letting him into the side, considering their statements, but had to consider the backlash and how it would look if they stuck by him so they decided to let him go.

Everton might need a striker that isn't shit very badly, but I'm not sure if it's worth it to Everton to make their atmosphere even more toxic than it already is by getting fans pissed off at their higher ups (more than they already are) just by taking him in. Most Evertonians already hate Moshiri & Kenwright & co., I can't imagine how angry their fans would be at the club if they ended up taking Greenwood with them.

I think his best bet is staying clear out of the UK. Honestly, he's probably praying for a Saudi club to be interested. He can make serious money again and very few people would give a fuck about the allegations there.

[CaaC (John)+]

All this crap saying "I never did that...", there is no smoke without fire, many moons ago in Aussie land one of my eldest sisters was married to a bastard that when they split up after abuse from him, violence, he took her first child only 6 months old and fled home to his own flat then.

My old man and mother went around to get the wee girl and the bastard stood outside his flat door holding the baby up side down by the feet swinging her, my mother managed to grab her and then my old man kicked the shit out of him.

He called the police and tried to get my old man charged with assault but when my old man told the police what he did the bastard said "I did not do that", the police let it go and warned the 2 of them.

Back in those days you did not have mobile phones taking videos or computers, it was all word of mouth so how could Greenwood say "I did not do that" when there was video evidence of such.

As the saying goes, a leopard never changes its spots and I pity Greenwood's girlfriend if she forgave him.  

[Dan+]

On 17/08/2023 at 23:43, Devil-Dick Willie said:

If that dog ever plays again I want away fans (and as many home fans who aren't gawking tourists) to make this Kurt Zouma x100. Absolutely bomb him with hate. Make his playing in England untenable. 

This was the small part of me that wanted it to happen. Because it would create such a sideshow that embarrassed everybody involved. Somebody is genuinely snapping him at some point if it happened.

[OrangeKhrush]

8 hours ago, Tommy said:

He's be a perfect fit for Saudi Arabia. 

not after signing the television deals and looking to boost the league's profile

[OrangeKhrush]

The Turkish league may take him.

[Tar-Mairon]

Let's say, hypothetically (and I do not believe this), that the girlfriend received her injuries in another way and let's say that the audio was some kind of rape-kink roleplay. It might be distasteful but it would make you think that Greenwood, his girlfriend and United would come forth and explain it, saying that while it was just a fantasy that Greenwood totally understands how abhorrent the actual crime of rape is and that he could stay while committing himself to working with charities for anyone disturbed by the video.

Or are United and Greenwood going by the "well, he threatened to rape her but he didn't actually end up doing it" so all is OK?

Greenwood talked about the "mistakes" he made in his relationship connected to this suggesting something obviously went on but United have grasped for every technicality they can to make themselves not look bad.

Horrible from United.

That United were investigating this in the first place is laughable. They're a football club, not DV/SA experts.

 

 

 

[Stan]

19 minutes ago, Tar-Mairon said:

That United were investigating this in the first place is laughable. They're a football club, not DV/SA experts.

 

They're investigating his conduct.

But in any case, every single individual or organisation has a duty of care to its employees and if that means investigating a subject as sensitive as DA that their player has been involved in, then so be it. If it helps then learn about what to do in future or how to approach it then that's a positive out of the whole situation. 

[Fairy In Boots]

Her dad pressured her to drop the charges because Mason is the meal ticket and she has his kid. He’s always been a scumbag, we’re not talking about a good bloke wronged here. There’s loads of stories about him being a right little C word.  
 

Now it’s PR spin but in reality, it’s about money, from United perspective and hers, she gets that baby daddy money if he goes on to have a successful career hence charges dropped and United don’t want to write off an asset, if he’s not sold it will be a loan in the hope that he goes away the hate dies down and he can be sold for a decent sum. United don’t give a fuck about public opinion in reality, they haven’t since day 1, this has always been about recouping losses. 

the term “yesterdays chip paper” is used a lot in football with regards to negative headlines with players, they underestimated the staying power of this story. 
 

 

[Dave]

What a cretin this bloke is.

 

Richard Arnold's statement was terrible too, anybody involved in the preparation of that statement should resign, including Richard Arnold.

[Cicero]

22 hours ago, Cicero said:

Reckon he goes to Saudi. 

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

3 hours ago, Cicero said:

 

Apparently some Saudi connected with their ministry of sports says it's unlikely due to how women's interest in Saudi Arabia is at it's all time high and they want to keep that high and are concerned Greenwood might turn women away from football. Also it's probably the wrong sort of attention they want to bring to their league after spending millions bringing in high profile names. Opposite sort of PR they're hoping for with that league I'm fairly certain.

Especially with the Messi effect looking to actually generate interest in the MLS in a way that signing other European stars never really did for the league. It makes sense they'll want to protect the image of the league.