Mason Greenwood | Officially a Marseille player

Status
Not open for further replies.
So they took this much time to just say what was the eventuality, what was literally the sensible call from start. I believe from what I’ve read in the caf, that was always the opinion.

Man Utd is the most covered club agreed, but the PR team, general counsel and CEO actions state it’s a talentless and average workplace, with leadership out of its depth.

They don’t have the guile to make hard decisions,when it matters, instead put the club‘s image in harms way more often than not.

I’m just tired of supporting this club now, nothing will change until the leadership is different.
 
Every time he'd score it would be a weird mixed reaction in the ground. If he had a bad game or run of bad form it would be very toxic and distracting. It's best he goes.

I think he should play in another country as too many rival fans will make it hostile.
 
Club were going to reinstate him, then got spooked out of doing so by The Athletic who I can guarantee will have less than half of what they have been to say when he goes on to another club.
 
they made a right mess out of that process. They did end up with the correct decision, but it's pretty bleak it took Adam Crafton's reporting and severe backlash from the supporters to make it happen.
 
crossy1686 said:
Remember at Christmas when they were sounding out whether or not we'd be happy with Arnautovic? They did the same here with Greenwood.
Click to expand...

Yep, which is beyond mental how we operate. There's no backbone or strength to the organisation. We're making the right decisions, but how we're getting to them is tragic.
 
Correct decision which should have been made very early. The club handled it very poorly.
 
We are run by corrupt, inept scum. Greenwood should have probably been release months ago but these parasites wanted to be sure there wasn't way to milk him for a few more bucks. We will never win ANYTHING as long as these freaks are in charge. They will NEVER leave until they lose money. We need to STOP giving them ANY money. I mean ANY.
 
Thank God the loons running this club noticed enough backlash to reverse an absolutely horrendous potential decision.
 
Ricardo de la Vega said:
Why? He could have just played next week. fecking Muppets booing him irrationally don't change that.
Click to expand...

He made his choices, he can live with them now. Booing wouldn’t have been irrational, I’ve no doubt it would have been huge mistake having him back and doubt he’d stay out of trouble.
 
Yorkeontop said:
It's honest. And it does leave room for him to come back.
Click to expand...
He'll certainly won't come back. I can see him going world-class elsewhere. The boy has talent, he's the best product from the academy since class of 92.
 
Hoping this saga ends now. Reading some of the comments about him over the last few months has really made me question humanity.
 
Terrible decision! Basically wilted to trial by social media! They reviewed everything, believe he was innocent yet still get rid! Pathetic- and a sad state of modern society!
 
The amount of times she's been called an "alleged victim" in that statement is astonishing.
 
Fr. Todd Unctious said:
Correct decision and one they shouldn't have dallied over and were effectively forced into in light of the Athletic article. Needless own goal from the club. Was always the best for both sides to go like this that's what makes it so stupid what they did.
Click to expand...

Its always easy to offer opinions in hindsight.

ETH clearly wanted him back. The commercial guys didn't because of the effect on the brand. The financial guys obviously see it as a huge financial hit in terms of asset value. So what do you do? Make a decision that affects the football performance?

Now we will go in with fewer striking options -- and probably need to keep Martial instead of selling him off. And we won't have the money to get another more experienced striker unless some freebie like Woghorst.
 
Such a sad ending to what could have been a great story. But continuing it would have been too difficult due to the fact that the public opinion would have been too distracting.
 
Ricardo de la Vega said:
Ridiculous this. Man not proven guilty of anything. Unable to defend himself in public. Club accept he probably didn't do it. Still have to ship him out because people are Muppets and you have to appease them. Utter stupidity.
Click to expand...

You’re going to get more clout tearing someone down. It’s the way of the world these days, no room for mistakes only perfection will do.
 
*Sigh of relief* Good, him coming back would feck up our atmosphere in the club even more. I saw people "threatening" to leave and support Man City if the club don't bring Greenwood back, that is win win, clear some trash from our fanbase too at the same time.
 
Judas said:
Yep, which is beyond mental how we operate. There's no backbone or strength to the organisation. We're making the right decisions, but how we're getting to them is tragic.
Click to expand...
The choice always comes down to "what will cost us the most money?". They want to sounds us out for all their dodgy decisions but when we actually want to be heard they don't listen.
 
That statement from United is a disgrace. It's a wonder how these clowns run a bath never mind a football club. It's completely tone deaf and feels like it's appeasing people who use phrases like "woke" and "cancel culture".

Unless there was any way they could have proven the video and audio recording that was in the public domain was not domestic abuse, they should never even have entertained bringing him back.

The fact they haven't been able to do that tells you everything.
 
Correct decision. I understand the various issues but frankly I'm just relieved that they have at least arrived at the correct decision for now.
 
flameinthesun said:
It was necessary if they had more access to information than we had and came to that conclusion.
Click to expand...
Not sure about that one chief.

The only people who should make comment in regards to what happened are the two people who were in the room, one of whom has lifelong anonymity.

Manchester United has no need to make that statement imo.

It appears to me, if anything, it was probably a bargaining tool out forward to make this a 'mutual agreement', rather than relieving of duties which would incur a financial cost to the club.
 
Really odd statement. If they really believe he was innocent they should have the balls to back him? So they think he's innocent, Mason has said he's made mistakes (wtf is that about) and are still releasing him, makes very little sense?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.