According to.the press it was the Mother who.was contacted by the club to confirm the findings of.the inquiry and not the Dad
Mason Greenwood | Please be respectful and stay on topic
- Thread starter keithsingleton
- Start date
Exactly. That explanation simply doesn’t pass the bullsh1t test in any way.
Yeah, the role play stuff doesn’t wash at all. The only mitigation I could imagine in terms of the “new material” referred to by the CPS would be if the recording goes on a bit longer and she tells him to go feck himself a bit more firmly and he backs down. +/- some sort of apology. If this comes out to support him then he’d have to rule out any possibility that the audio was faked/manipulated or that the whole thing was actually role play. And that would copper fasten the damage to his reputation. So the ongoing uncertainty about this additional evidence suits him. Even if it means the end of his United career.
I see they’ve named a new mode after people who believe the role play scenario.
People have no standards? Sorry but I have extremely strong feelings against women abusers. It's one of the vilest things one can ever do and there's zero excuse for that. Yeah, everyone deserves a second chance but still, feck Chris Brown and his ilk. He won't see me at one of his concerts or buy one of his albums (not that he'd care). It also happened in the US and, from what I've gathered here and unless I'm wrong, they seem to be far more permissive than in Europe.
For me it always was clear that MG would never wear MU's shirt again. It was suicide to try to get him back in the team and I'm frankly baffled that 1) Arnold thought it was even possible and 2) EtH, from what I'm reading, was apparently okay with that. Please, correct me if I'm wrong. If there wasn't the audio and the pics maybe, it would then boil down to her word against his, but as it is and considering MU's media exposure? What were they even thinking?
It absolutely reeks of desperation. This guy would have been booted eons ago if he was average and nobody would've bat an eyelid. People are going through all sorts of mental gymnastic to play down, if not excuse his behavior because United are in dire need of a good RW. If one thinks that employing someone talking to his GF the way he did and using her as a punching bag doesn't lower the standards of their club nor justify fecking him off, then there's nothing I can say.
As for how long, I don't know. I might have gone overboard in saying his career is over but honestly still can't see it. Certainly not now, certainly not in England and certainly not at United. He should go far, far away from the PL, start over, show real repentance, not the half-assed PR and partly false statement (he wasn't cleared, the charges were dropped) his lawyers cooked for him, bide his time and maybe one day, a big club (not an english one) will decide that he's worth a punt. If his performances still allow it, mind. His story with United and England is absolutely over though. People should come to terms with that.
He made his bed and will now have to lie in it.
Last edited:
Good sir, you, by far, have the most posts in this thread. Are you ok?Oh mate, you've missed some corkers including, and I'm not kidding:
Maybe he was sleeping and she woke him up hence the attitude, calling the whole of England racist, suggesting the actual rape is from the public on the woman, and perhaps most bizarrely...blaming Simon Cowell
Shout out to the mods and admin who must be pulling their hair out going over this thread. It is brain damage just posting in it. But I will point out people should take note of the lack of bannings and how they've allowed people to have plenty of speech, even the god awful takes. It is outstanding restraint, as there's especially two posters who could easily be booted out for their abhorrent posts.
Christ…. just stumbled across this pile of shit!
One of the most sickening posts I’ve ever read on Red Cafe.
Yep, that's a possibility I hadn't considered but could make sense. It's definitely not beyond the realms of possibility that the haziness around this additional evidence that everyone in the know seems so leery of leaking works very much in his favour
Different circumstances. A number of club employees were literally planning a strike if Greenwood was brought back. If SAF was our manager today he would've got rid of him. He valued a family atmosphere at United more than anything. He treated the canteen ladies for example like they were as important as the players. No way would he have good people quitting on his watch.
Yeah but SAF claimed rape allegations were an in house club matter
Different time and all that but if he said that today he himself would have to go alongside Mason.
Just saying that super imposing what would SAF do mightn’t be the smartest thread to follow. That man was fiercely loyal
Will definitely play for England again.
If they were faked, this would have become clear very early on in the investigation.
Of all the theories about it, it's the least plausible. People like to go from zero to crazy though.
It’s not even mental gymnastics it’s quite simple. There is a privilege that goes with status it’s not new and it not hard to comprehend. Women have always had this ‘pretty privilege’ and people of status tend to get away with things the normal man wouldn’t. Ever read about Henry VIII.
I understand we are in an era where we are all trying to make the world right and all but I was just pointing out the inconsistency that remain and will always remain to an extent.
Flair play the right thing was done based on what we perceived to be true. But I’m pretty sure not too far in the future something similar will happen to someone who you don’t care about or that impacts you directly I.e. the football club you support and you won’t have the same energy or seek to ask the same question about equality.
But hey as I said at the start it’s just life and I for one won’t judge.
Can you elaborate on this view? What makes Rachel Riley worse than Greenwood? I am extremely curious to hear this.
I really think he is going to struggle to find another club. England is surely out of the question due to public backlash, and now apparently a few Saudi clubs have reportedly refused to be linked with him. All his own doing of course.
By my standards, surprisingly yesGood sir, you, by far, have the most posts in this thread. Are you ok?
I wouldn't bet on it. Unless, of course, he turns into the top striker in the world.
If only the British press showed the same energy against the Glazers.
Please don’t prod this hornet’s nest, guarantee something anti semitic is brewing here.
If Mason retired today and disappeared into obscurity and the club gave up all financial interest in him then maybe their narrative of "nah trust us we didn't do it" would sit better and that privacy could be more easily respected. But they've both seemingly committed to keep their stake in him as a footballer.
And when you have the responsibilities as a community club and as a business to a culture of taking violence against women seriously, when you have a responsibility to charity partners and a duty of care to female fans and you have a responsibility to society to not be a shitbag organisation, then their stance doesn't cut it for me.
Because the truth is that they've already abused that trust.
Like I said yesterday, Jamicia will try and get him.
Never been so excited by a youth prospect in my life.
What an absolute mess.
What an absolute mess.
Rachel Riley still not happy after threatening to ‘abandon’ Utd if she didn’t get the outcome she wanted…
BBC - Rachel Riley now accuses Man Utd of gaslighting
BBC - Rachel Riley now accuses Man Utd of gaslighting
Don’t drop my country name inna you politics. If England nuh want him. We nuh want him either.
We stand for whatever England stand for thank you very much. Not this it’s okay aslong as it’s over their rubbish.
I think this will point fingers in the right direction concerning Arnold's handling of the entire situation.
I didn't say otherwise.
She can feck off to be honest.
The media is bow creating false transfer stories yo random clubs then a few hours later they contact the clubs to confirm their made up stories. The clubs officially deny the transfer rumours thereby creating a vicious cycle of negative news about Mason to.gove impression that no one wants to sign him.
When.he is eventually signed they will hound that club and create lots of negative stories about it. A Greenwood watch cannot be ruled out
When.he is eventually signed they will hound that club and create lots of negative stories about it. A Greenwood watch cannot be ruled out
This
Press smell blood in the water and will be loving the clicks this is generating
Is this what your sources in the Jamaican delegation have been whispering to you?
It was also reported that she had the opportunity to dispute or agree with the findings but opted not to do either.
She need to shut the feck up.
Why should she?
Perhaps it was an issue with not clarifying/qualifying the term' proof' - the key point is that there'll never be sufficient evidence (as in, formally, abstractly 'never enough', rather than some particular threshold) to change the minds of people who've decided that he's guilty. Hence the extreme example.
So, it would be equivalent to someone being found with drugs in a side pocket of their rucksack at the airport, claiming that they had no knowledge of drugs being placed in their bag, and then a cctv file emerging that showed the drugs being planted... then some second person, confronted with the video, still claiming that the first person was guilty of smuggling, with this claim being justified by (a) the exonerating CCTV was someone faked or (b) it was a 'set-up with an accomplice to create an alibi' without having other evidence to support either claim. Both of those statements might refer to something actually true but are pure conjecture in terms of the basis for arriving at that claim regardless, and that person wouldn't be justified in claiming 'I know they created an alibi'. The denial moves from reasonable interpretation of evidence to exposing something biased or pathological about the second person insisting upon it in the face of new evidence.
We don't have evidence of 'evidence' being manufactured in quite the same explicit way, but we do have doubt, not only over whether MG was guilty of the accused offences but also whether he was guilty of verbal abuse; I think he probably did engage in verbally abusive , misogynistic behaviour, taking all the public evidence into account, but I don't have enough evidence to determine if this is true and the severity of this, beyond a recording whose creation has been exposed to a kind of radical doubt. Everyone should be agnostic on this issue, to the extent that they're thinking about it at all.
Other posters have also pointed out throughout this discussion following the withdrawal of charges and release of new information regarding the evidence, that those continuing to make judgements were justifying these on the basis of 'facts' which were themselves based upon an evidence that had been deemed to be unreliable. There are still questions about whether this non- reliability is just 'additional context' (regarding the audio file; the claim from the former accuser was that the photos were mocked, 'Amber Heard style'. as other people have described it), related to a 'game', or were tampered with digitally. This is also in the face of verbal statements that physical abuse didn't take place, of support from the family regarding these claims, of the accuser being willingly involved once again with MG in a long-term relationship (including raising a family) and the framing of the public statements regarding the withdrawal by CPS of the case - not only did the witness withdraw but the evidence itself was brought into question to an extent that a prosecution would not succeed. This is the same evidence that large numbers of people here assert is incontestable.
People making statements that they 'know' what happened isn't just dumb, but actively offensive. It's basically bare-faced public lying, it cheapens public conversation/discourse, and its disheartening.
Am I missing something or is someone implying Rachel Riley has done something wrong?
This is the problem with bowing to outside pressure when making difficult decisions. It's never enough
I've nothing against Riley but she probably feels empowered now and that she has some level of influence, whether her views had any bearing at all on the outcome so is now using her position again.
One thing she should be called out on though is the idea that not condemning something equates to justification and even encouragement of it. The club should be the ones to call her out on this but I doubt they will.
dont forget why he was kicked out of the england squad while HE was there
Whatever money we get for him we should give it in full to the women’s team. I reckon that would be a nice gesture. Club may even save face over this diabolical situation.
Regardless of what's she's said on Greenwood, Rachel Riley is a bit of a cnut, enough of which that I'd happily avoid reading any opinions of hers for the rest of my life.
Hopefully she doesn't read this and try to sue me.
Hopefully she doesn't read this and try to sue me.
She does not need to. But she she is talking crap. She is self indulgent and using this case for her own ends. She is not a legal expert and should not be using her so called celebrity to hold the club to ransom.
If she feels that strongly, why she does not do some representation for women's refuge or other abuse charities?