You have literally shown yourself up over the last few months of this forum as someone who has morals that change at the drop of a hat. After insulting Qatar and petrol states before any takeover talks you become synonymous for shilling for Qatari money once it benefited you.
You have no qualms about changing morals depending on how it influences your life. You absolutely are not someone who gets to tell anyone how they come to a moral decision.
This transitory moral position occurs when supporters make the club its own moral paragon, and then discuss ethical matters as though they were optional appendages.
A bit like supporters who applaud the tories because it 'winds up the Scouse' but would never themselves vote for them (the tories, not the scousers).
The problem stems largely from the fact the recording and images were made public.
The explanation for what they actually were, that exonerates him, has not been shared.
Until that happens then there is a significant problem - rightly or wrongly.
If United bring him back without explaining what the actual explanation for what the footage actually was, then there will be a massive shit storm.
For many supporters who value things like moral decency and women's rights ahead of sporting ability it will be hard to reconcile with the club.
Nail on the head.
'Innocent until proven guilty' is, as ever, being proved insufficient. Greenwood's innocence has never itself been proven.
However, and this I admit is conjecture, Ratcliffe may wish to remove certain types of supporter, and would welcome a boycott because they are replaceable.
This process will be deeply political and I hope to heck I am wrong about it, but it's consistent with Ratcliffe's political ambition.