Mason Greenwood | Please be respectful and stay on topic

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Unbanned and straight back in the saddle with gusto. Impressive.
Relax, breathe gently, and do a spellcheck occasionally.

I was addresed directly. I have responded directly. If you have an issue with me responding when I am asked directly. That is your own issue to deal with. Unless its suddenly banned on here to actually attempt to have a discussion on anything.

 

[moses]

I was addresed directly. I have responded directly. If you have an issue with me responding when I am asked directly. That is your own issue to deal with. Unless its suddenly banned on here to actually attempt to have a discussion on anything.

Don't be so dramatic, I was just pointing out that your zeal was impeding your articulacy. And your ability to read too it seems.

 

[NZT-One]

No one has absolved him of a thing. Thats what people like you simply REFUSE to understand. They rather simply are not as eager as you to him a certified criminal of a post from social media, no MATTER how daming it may appear to be! It's No wonder you came up with a non sequitur fallacy of an analogy as "you robbing a bank" to compare. Because people like you have convinced themselves they know all the facts of the case and every context of the evidence. To hell with due process. To hell with investigation. Just lock him up and throw away the key or cancel him out of society. You don't care either way. You just want him ruined and gone. It wouldn't be a suprise if you had the same sentiments for those who don't agree.

Who would have expected that this day will come. Completely agree with you here.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Don't be so dramatic, I was just pointing out that your zeal was impeding your articulacy. And your ability to read too it seems.

Now who's being dramatic? I'm not even 30 mins and you are already starting to blatantly abuse me for replying to postsDude get some perm for your attitude. You need to relax.

 

[moses]

Who would have expected that this day will come. Completely agree with you here.

Nobody has said lock him up though, just mostly that they would prefer he'd be a millionaire somewhere else. Which is quite a different thing.

You lot are arguing against imaginary loons to validate your own hysteria.

 

[moses]

Now who's being dramatic? I'm not even 30 mins and you are already starting to blatantly abuse me for replying to postsDude get some perm for your attitude. You need to relax.

I took the piss out of your consistent bad spelling. You got into some paranoia about shutting down debate and free speech.

Again, chill a wee bit. This thread can do without your unhinged energy.

 

[Lost bear]

And, again: it is extremely unlikely to get a conviction in a case like this when the (alleged) victim withdraws and won't testify.

(Yes, I am aware that "new evidence" was also stated.)

Those are the key points. I’d be fascinated to learn what the ‘new evidence’ is.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

Please can people disagree agreeably?

 

[flameinthesun]

Unbanned and straight back in the saddle with gusto. Impressive.
Relax, breathe gently, and do a spellcheck occasionally.

I agree. Relax, breathe gently.

That was deliberate you clown. I even closed with 'speculation is dangerous'. I was being as deliberately obtuse as every other twat in that thread.

 

[moses]

I agree. Relax, breathe gently.

What are you at? You're really bringing a whole other conversation from the general about the time you didn't get an obvious joke in here? To prove what exactly?

Your fascination with me is only dwarfed by your obsession with Mason Greenwood. Neither are healthy.

Now please stop derailing the thread.

Continue whatever point you are trying to make in the original thread or by PM, not here. Thanks.

 

[NZT-One]

Nobody has said lock him up though, just mostly that they would prefer he'd be a millionaire somewhere else. Which is quite a different thing.

I agree. But that wasn't something the post I replied to took question on, or did I miss something?

You lot are arguing against imaginary loons to validate your own hysteria.

You lot... Ok. I think, I haven't posted in this thread at all before. So maybe you double check your own level of hysteria as well
The way this debate is going on is crazy. From both sides. Even the "relax" advice is swinging around, one time it is the one side, next time it is the other.

And for the record. I am perfectly fine if you don't want the player not to be associated with the club. We don't have to agree here, don't we.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

So glad I’m not staff/a mod … I haven’t got anywhere near the patience

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

I took the piss out of your consistent bad spelling. You got into some paranoia about shutting down debate and free speech.

Again, chill a wee bit. This thread can do without your unhinged energy.

This is remarkable! There are people in this thread
throwing out accusations at people such as rape apologists and lack of morals. Which most common sense folks would classify as 'unhinged energy'. But you 'draw the line" supposedly at my spelling mistakes (off a language that is my second language) and me wondering why you are so bothered that am replying to posts directly responding to me. Which you label as 'some paranoia about shutting down debate and free speech" ? Like I didn't just get a temp ban for simply highlighting the hypocricsisy and virtue signaling of people labeling others "rape apologists, intellectually dishonest and lacking in morals" just because we aren't as eager to condemn Greenwood as a criminal as they are?

To top it all you have been directly attacking me since I returned. Mocking my spelling, my comprehension ability and my overall intelligence. Now you have labelled me paranoid. Just because I told YOU to take a chill pill. I haven't responded in kind once.

As stated earlier. You have issues and I will now leave you to them.

 

[moses]

I agree. But that wasn't something the post I replied to took question on, or did I miss something?


You lot... Ok. I think, I haven't posted in this thread at all before. So maybe you double check your own level of hysteria as well
The way this debate is going on is crazy. From both sides. Even the "relax" advice is swinging around, one time it is the one side, next time it is the other.

And for the record. I am perfectly fine if you don't want the player not to be associated with the club. We don't have to agree here, don't we.

To answer your first bit, you didnt say it, but you agreed with a post that did.

Yeah, sorry that was lazy of me. I aligned you with the Chief because you both 'agreed' that people were calling for him to be locked up. I was basing it on an admittedly small sample.

It was me who said relax first , as the poster came back from a ban resulting from posts in this thread with quite a heated post.


Edit - Also, yeah it's fine to think different things. Shouting them consistently is another matter. As is arguing in bad faith. Neither of which I'm accusing you of, but it's why the thread is such a mess all round.

 

[moses]

This is remarkable! There are people in this thread
throwing out accusations at people such as rape apologists and lack of morals. Which most common sense folks would classify as 'unhinged energy'. But you 'draw the line" supposedly at my spelling mistakes (off a language that is my second language) and me wondering why you are so bothered that am replying to posts directly responding to me. Which you label as 'some paranoia about shutting down debate and free speech" ? Like I didn't just get a temp ban for simply highlighting the hypocricsisy and virtue signaling of people labeling others "rape apologists, intellectually dishonest and lacking in morals" just because we aren't as eager to condemn Greenwood as a criminal as they are?

To top it all you have been directly attacking me since I returned. Mocking my spelling, my comprehension ability and my overall intelligence. Now you have labelled me paranoid. Just because I told YOU to take a chill pill. I haven't responded in kind once.

As stated earlier. You have issues and I will now leave you to them.

I didn't draw any line. You're very sensitive. And keep making things up. This thread needs calmer heads than yours.

Take a few hours off and try again later.

 

[NZT-One]

To answer your first bit, you didnt say it, but you agreed with a post that did.

Yeah, sorry that was lazy of me. I aligned you with the Chief because you both 'agreed' that people were calling for him to be locked up. I was basing it on an admittedly small sample.

It was me who said relax first , as the poster on question came back from a ban resulting from posts in this thread with quite a heated post.

Ah I see. Seems like you and the poster I replied to have some history. I re-read the post I agreed to and I just agreed on the general point there with people acting as if they know all the details. If there was some context to it, I wasn't aware of it. I just dip my toe into this thread to look for any "actual updates". Think, two years ago I joined the debate very early on for a few posts but it became some sort of circle reference. Who would have thought, that this issue will provide such an everlasting conflict. I mean, the ingredients are all there, both sides have some points, it can't be denied, that the story touches very personal points and experiences with all sorts of individual people and a law system who produced a result that, for some, felt incomplete - so it makes sense somewhere but it is still stunning to see it play out in the real world.

 

[moses]

Ah I see. Seems like you and the poster I replied to have some history. I re-read the post I agreed to and I just agreed on the general point there with people acting as if they know all the details. If there was some context to it, I wasn't aware of it. I just dip my toe into this thread to look for any "actual updates". Think, two years ago I joined the debate very early on for a few posts but it became some sort of circle reference. Who would have thought, that this issue will provide such an everlasting conflict. I mean, the ingredients are all there, both sides have some points, it can't be denied, that the story touches very personal points and experiences with all sorts of individual people and a law system who produced a result that, for some, felt incomplete - so it makes sense somewhere but it is still stunning to see it play out in the real world.

No history I can think of between us, I just have access to the moderation logs, as all the mods do.

Yeah, we have limited data, so both sides have to use their judgement.

 

[Leftback99]

I see this thread active and I hope it's news that we've sold him for anything we can get but instead it's just the same terrible arguments over and over.

 

[P-Nut]

So glad I’m not staff/a mod … I haven’t got anywhere near the patience

There'd be about 10 posters left by the end of day 1

 

[Fridge chutney]

I didn't draw any line. You're very sensitive. And keep making things up. This thread needs calmer heads than yours.

Take a few hours off and try again later.

Don't you get it yet Moses? It is people defending Greenwood and Greenwood himself who are the true victims here!

 

[JPRouve]

This conversation is basically stuck to the exact same point for the past 12 months?

 

[Fridge chutney]

This conversation is basically stuck to the exact same point for the past 12 months?

With posters who have varying degrees of energy, patience and in some cases, warning points, periodically re-entering the discussion... And i don't see it ending anytime soon!

 

[Raoul]

This conversation is basically stuck to the exact same point for the past 12 months?

You could check back in 6-12 months and the arguments would still be ongoing. Probably even more so given that he will either be back or sold by then.

 

[JPRouve]

You could check back in 6-12 months and the arguments would still be ongoing. Probably even more so given that he will either be back or sold by then.

I kind of avoid this thread and always assumed that the activity was based on some news but no, it's the exact same "proof" or "all the details" debate.

 

[moses]

You could check back in 6-12 months and the arguments would still be ongoing. Probably even more so given that he will either be back or sold by then.

If he's back it'll go on indefinitely. But surely if he is sold it will lose momentum? Surely?

 

[BristolMick]

Is there a credible poll which shows the overall opinion on Greenwood? Has his time away on loan made more people open to his return? Would be interesting to know if views have changed with time.

 

[JPRouve]

If he's back it'll go on indefinitely. But surely if he is sold it will lose momentum? Surely?

My guess is that it will only lose momentum if he has an underwhelming career. If he is successful that conversation will never end which is silly because there is conversation or debate. One side based on available information believes that he is either innocent or deserves the benefit of doubts while the other side believes that is guilty(morally) or doesn't deserve the benefit of doubts. These aren't reconcilable positions and any more discussions are pointless.

 

[moses]

My guess is that it will only lose momentum if he has an underwhelming career. If he is successful that conversation will never end which is silly because there is conversation or debate. One side based on available information believes that he is either innocent or deserves the benefit of doubts while the other side believes that is guilty(morally) or doesn't deserve the benefit of doubts. These aren't reconcilable positions and any more discussions are pointless.

Yes, you're probably right.

 

[Raoul]

My guess is that it will only lose momentum if he has an underwhelming career. If he is successful that conversation will never end which is silly because there is conversation or debate. One side based on available information believes that he is either innocent or deserves the benefit of doubts while the other side believes that is guilty(morally) or doesn't deserve the benefit of doubts. These aren't reconcilable positions and any more discussions are pointless.

Assuming he doesn’t return, his progress will be followed very closely in the football forum and if he has success at another club, you can bet the farm the arguments will resume.

 

[Pickle85]

Its no surprise you'd think that. After all you are siding with someone eager to label people willy nilly rape appolgists and moral bankrupt just because they don't believe as you do. You'd rather concentrate on the mundane than the serious.

Nope. Just a reminder that it you're going to wade into debates accusing folks that disagree with you of intellectual dwarfism (not cool, by the way), then you'd better be beyond reproach on that front yourself. Anyways, it's long been clear that you suffer from the terrifying combination of never admitting fault/that you're wrong and needing to have the last word, so ill leave it at that.

 

[gajender]

Assuming he doesn’t return, his progress will be followed very closely in the football forum and if he has success at another club, you can bet the farm the arguments will resume.

I think it also depends whether United are able to turn around it's fortune or not , if United becomes successfull again chances are most would probably move on .

 

[Chesterlestreet]

I can't believe that anyone thinks that the Man Utd statement was anything other than PR to protect the value of an asset.

They probably don't. But it works in an argument-from-authority sort of way. United carried out a solid, professional investigation (an actual lawyer was involved!) and concluded Mason was not guilty of the original charge(s). End of, yeah?

It no shape or form could or has the club conducted anything resembling a criminal level investigation with full access.

Obviously not.

 

[Fridge chutney]

They probably don't. But it works in an argument-from-authority sort of way. United carried out a solid, professional investigation (an actual lawyer was involved!) and concluded Mason was not guilty of the original charge(s). End of, yeah?



Obviously not.

Spot on.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Is there a credible poll which shows the overall opinion on Greenwood? Has his time away on loan made more people open to his return? Would be interesting to know if views have changed with time.

The Athletic did a poll back in August.

https://theathletic.com/4787300/2023/08/19/manchester-united-fan-survey-greenwood/

My guess would be that it'd be more like 50/50 now (among people who vote in Athletic polls, that is - and how representative they are of the fan base as such is obviously a separate question).

The "would still support United if he were brought back" percentage is probably north of 90%, can't imagine anything else.

 

[Raoul]

The Athletic did a poll back in August.

https://theathletic.com/4787300/2023/08/19/manchester-united-fan-survey-greenwood/

My guess would be that it'd be more like 50/50 now (among people who vote in Athletic polls, that is - and how representative they are of the fan base as such is obviously a separate question).

The "would still support United if he were brought back" percentage is probably north of 90%, can't imagine anything else.

We were at near 50/50 during our last poll here, so would be interesting to see if there’s been any movement since the loan.

 

[goalscholes]

A question for the Greenwood outers/ those who are not sure.

Imagine he signed for a team like Barcelona this summer, and spent the next three seasons being one of the best in the world: being nominated for the balon d’or, 35+ goal interventions etc. then left them on a free transfer. No other criminal charges, was still with his child’s mother, kept his head down and seemed much more down to earth.

Would you take him back then?

 

[moses]

A question for the Greenwood outers/ those who are not sure.

Imagine he signed for a team like Barcelona this summer, and spent the next three seasons being one of the best in the world: being nominated for the balon d’or, 35+ goal interventions etc. then left them on a free transfer. No other criminal charges, was still with his child’s mother, kept his head down and seemed much more down to earth.

Would you take him back then?

It's not about football. He's a great footballer.

 

[Raoul]

A question for the Greenwood outers/ those who are not sure.

Imagine he signed for a team like Barcelona this summer, and spent the next three seasons being one of the best in the world: being nominated for the balon d’or, 35+ goal interventions etc. then left them on a free transfer. No other criminal charges, was still with his child’s mother, kept his head down and seemed much more down to earth.

Would you take him back then?

Likely not given their beef is with Greenwood on moral grounds, not his football prowess. If the scenario you describe were to play out, it’ would however give Greenwood in and some neutral posters something to talk about.

 

[Bastian]

I'm more interested in what we can fetch from selling him. If it's close to his footballing ability it'll be above 50m surely. Is that realistic? That would go quite far in fixing our FFP issues and we might not need all the 230m or whatever it is in sterling to go towards some minor OT improvement.

If he is sold this summer is that clause with Getafe still active, i.e. they cash in 20% ?

edit: I also think it's best for him and his young family to get a fresh start elsewhere

 

[FortunaUtd]

A question for the Greenwood outers/ those who are not sure.

Imagine he signed for a team like Barcelona this summer, and spent the next three seasons being one of the best in the world: being nominated for the balon d’or, 35+ goal interventions etc. then left them on a free transfer. No other criminal charges, was still with his child’s mother, kept his head down and seemed much more down to earth.

Would you take him back then?

Let us cross that bridge when we get to it, which is never.