Mason Greenwood | Please be respectful and stay on topic

[Solius]

It is entirely possible.

Why reject every other possible outcome?

Because otherwise we'd be entertaining endless theories. Maybe the audio was developed in a lab by our Pl rivals. Maybe he was acting in a play and is embarassed his love for acting will come out. It's pointless.

The logical conclusion is:

• He beat her multiple times in their relationship - She showed multiple pictures of multiple injuries with the caption "this is what Mason Greenwood does to me". Does. Not 'did'.
• He had tried to pressure her to have sex before this recording, because she had her phone ready to record covertly. This is only done by somebody who expects something to happen and highly likely they've experience the situation before and now have the presence of mind to be ready and record it this time.

Imo these two things are indisputable but since nothing is ever 100% people find it convenient to hide behind that fact.

 

[united for life]

I'm amazed anyone would read the comments section of the DM and think it's a good source for reasoned opinion. Scratch that, I'm amazed anyone would read the comments section of the DM full stop.

He hasn't been cleared. The charges have been dropped. There's a difference.

I'm amazed anyone would read the comments section of the DM and think it's a good source for reasoned opinion. Scratch that, I'm amazed anyone would read the comments section of the DM full stop.

He hasn't been cleared. The charges have been dropped. There's a difference.

if he’s going to play anywhere in the world, it might as well be us. I am afraid we are losing a very good player who can be an important part of our team for years. Read the united statement again. It says “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.”.

this seems to be ignored and we follow the hype that he should be sentenced for life.

he night have made a mistake, what it the level of his mistake? I dnt know. But as a young man, he should be given a chance to redeem himself and his future. Fairly.

 

[Pickle85]

Maybe, just maybe, there is more evidence.
Maybe this recording is a part of a larger recording that explains a lot.
Maybe Greenwood and ******* are silent, because they don't want a turn of events that will put HER in bad spotlight.
Maybe love conquers all.
Who the feck knows?

And no, I'm not saying this is the truth. I'm saying it's possible.
What bothers me is that a lot of posters here have already condemned Greenwood, 100% excluding the possibility that something didn't happen the way they imagine it did.


This picture speaks a lot to me.
We might never know the whole truth. But just think how the Johnny Depp - Amber Heard story unfolded. Until you know the whole truth, you can't condemn people.

But of course, everyone is free to think whatever they want to.

But we DO know the Depp/Heard truth, because Depp did what 99.9% of people accused of a crime that they didn't commit do: tell the story and absolutely refute the allegations unconditionally. Your post is revolting in that it victim blames covertly with the bolded while being too gutless to own this awful take by saying 'And no, I'm not saying this is the truth. I'm saying it's possible.' it's a pathetic position, quite frankly, and you should be ashamed.

 

[FrankWhite]

How another code deals with far less serious allegations. An official 18 match suspension and his club have sacked him.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...bourne-sacked-afl-player-ban-conduct-breaches

I think that's different though as the club is acting from a prespective that he's confirmed guilty. Our club is contradictory.

 

[Solius]

if he’s going to play anywhere in the world, it might as well be us. I am afraid we are losing a very good player who can be an important part of our team for years. Read the united statement again. It says “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.”.

this seems to be ignored and we follow the hype that he should be sentenced for life.

he night have made a mistake, what it the level of his mistake? I dnt know. But as a young man, he should be given a chance to redeem himself and his future. Fairly.

Joined in 2014? - check
Roughly 2000 posts? - check
Same tired argument? - check
Hyperbole claiming he's having his life ruined? - check

 

[Pickle85]

if he’s going to play anywhere in the world, it might as well be us. I am afraid we are losing a very good player who can be an important part of our team for years. Read the united statement again. It says “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.”.

this seems to be ignored and we follow the hype that he should be sentenced for life.

he night have made a mistake, what it the level of his mistake? I dnt know. But as a young man, he should be given a chance to redeem himself and his future. Fairly.

It's violent domestic assault and attempted rape ffs, it's not a 'mistake'. Can people stop using that word?!

 

[TsuWave]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is so insane to me

 

[gajender]

@Wibble,@moses ,@Solius, @Hernandez - BFA I have seen some statistics mentioned about DV victims on here . Would it be possible to point towards the best resources available online to gain insight on this .

Thanks in advance

 

[Solius]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is so insane to me

I think we'd possibly be in legal trouble if we donated any of the fee to something like a women's shelter. It would basically be the club admitting he did it, which they won't be allowed to do.

I also don't think it makes much sense outside of that. If we're selling him to another club for them to benefit from, we are entitled to compensation due to the money and years spent training him to that level.

 

[redcucumber]

Yet the "He is so great in Spain, I want him back" has to be balanced by the context of his appealing and unconscionable behavior. Otherwise you are excusing, and even normalising, domestic violence/controlling behaviour.

I agree. The counterweight to "He is so great in Spain, I want him back" isn't "this thread is a dumpster fire full of Daily Mail reading dregs", though. That's the point.

 

[Doracle]

Yet the "He is so great in Spain, I want him back" has to be balanced by the context of his appealing and unconscionable behavior. Otherwise you are excusing, and even normalising, domestic violence/controlling behaviour.

And yet the club declared they were satisfied he didn’t commit the offences he was charged with (which included assault and controlling behaviour). This was no doubt with the benefit of substantial expensive legal guidance as to the
merits. I regard it as utterly implausible that the club would lie about such a thing, just to try and protect a player’s value, so there is obviously more to the situation than it appears.

The reality is that this is someone who is innocent in the eyes of law and in the eyes of his club (at least of the offences he was charged with), who conducted a full investigation. It’s fine for people still not to want him back on the basis of the audio but the suggestion that people who think we should take him back are all DV apologists has to be taken in the context of our own club being satisfied that isn’t the case.

 

[ShinjiNinja26]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is so insane to me

It’s fecking nonsense is what it is.

 

[Solius]

@Wibble,@moses ,@Solius, @Hernandez - BFA I have seen some statistics mentioned about DV victims on here . Would it be possible to point towards the best resources available online to gain insight on this .

Thanks in advance

A couple below:

https://refuge.org.uk/what-is-domestic-abuse/the-facts/

https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/women-leave/

https://www.theguardian.com/money/u...private-violence-women-men-abuse-hbo-ray-rice

https://www.ncdv.org.uk/domestic-abuse-statistics-uk/

 

[Raoul]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is so insane to me

Seems like an opinion piece rather than something credible that’s actually being considered.

 

[Wibble]

And yet the club declared they were satisfied he didn’t commit the offences he was charged with (which included assault and controlling behaviour). This was no doubt with the benefit of substantial expensive legal guidance as to the
merits. I regard it as utterly implausible that the club would lie about such a thing, just to try and protect a player’s value, so there is obviously more to the situation than it appears.

The reality is that this is someone who is innocent in the eyes of law and in the eyes of his club (at least of the offences he was charged with), who conducted a full investigation. It’s fine for people still not to want him back on the basis of the audio but the suggestion that people who think we should take him back are all DV apologists has to be taken in the context of our own club being satisfied that isn’t the case.

You don't need expansive legal advice to now he wasn't convicted because the prosecution didn't progress.

 

[diarm]

What’s Jason Burts opinion on womens rights and protections in the places City and Newcastle get their money?

 

[Jippy]

Have you guys seen this ridiculous article?
I mean, it's one thing saying the player shouldn't return, but saying the club can't keep the funds from his sale is absolutely nuts. I'm sure revenue gained by the news outlet from this article will be keep by them but we have a moral obligation not to keep the money.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

What a load of pompous shit. He must know full well that the club is taking a massive loss on him, not 'gaining a financial advantage'.

No wonder they're not allowing comments on that article.

 

[Fts 74]

I think we just need to sell him and move on.

 

[Slops]

if he’s going to play anywhere in the world, it might as well be us. I am afraid we are losing a very good player who can be an important part of our team for years. Read the united statement again. It says “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.”.

this seems to be ignored and we follow the hype that he should be sentenced for life.

he night have made a mistake, what it the level of his mistake? I dnt know. But as a young man, he should be given a chance to redeem himself and his future. Fairly.

It's very possible that United's investigation didn't have access to some profound exonerating evidence, and simply that the statement is very cleverly worded PR. The club can not establish his guilt in a statement. Legally it's something they can't do.

Most of us have heard the recording, and in the absence of a better explanation for it, that's what we have. I'm not willing to accept 'but the club said' as sufficient to satisfy me of his innocence. If there's an explanation that genuinely negates the contents of the recording (and I can't imagine what that could even be, frankly), I'm not willing to take the club's word that it just exists and move on.

 

[moses]

It is entirely possible.

Why reject every other possible outcome?

It's a possible v probable conversation. Most things are possible.

 

[romufc]

It's very possible that United's investigation didn't have access to some profound exonerating evidence, and simply that the statement is very cleverly worded PR. The club can not establish his guilt in a statement. Legally it's something they can't do.

Most of us have heard the recording, and in the absence of a better explanation for it, that's what we have. I'm not willing to accept 'but the club said' as sufficient to satisfy me of his innocence. If there's an explanation that genuinely negates the contents of the recording (and I can't imagine what that could even be, frankly), I'm not willing to take the club's word that it just exists and move on.

Even though I am dont think Greenwood should play for us, its not the club, the legal system has not said he is guilty either, despite the recordings, which suggest he is guilty of something.

It is also possible that the club had more evidence than what the police had? There is no way, if the club thought he is guilty, they would have not ripped his contract up.

 

[Doracle]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is so insane to me

I can’t access this but what’s the Telegraph’s thought process for why we have to sell him and not keep any of the money? Are we allowed to recoup the wages we’ve paid over the last few years for no benefit?

 

[Doracle]

You don't need expansive legal advice to now he wasn't convicted because the prosecution didn't progress.

This is being deliberately obtuse as the statement did not say that the club was satisfied he had not been convicted of any offence. The statement released was that he had not committed any of the offences he was charged with. Those are very different things, as I’m sure you know.

 

[Slops]

Even though I am dont think Greenwood should play for us, its not the club, the legal system has not said he is guilty either, despite the recordings, which suggest he is guilty of something.

It is also possible that the club had more evidence than what the police had? There is no way, if the club thought he is guilty, they would have not ripped his contract up.

Is it possible? Maybe. I'm not sure. I'd be very surprised if the club has evidence that is being withheld from the police/prosecution.

 

[lex talionis]

United are in no way ethically obliged to relinquish any funds generated from selling Mason.

 

[davidmichael]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I’m no legal expert but wouldn’t this open us up to being sued by Greenwood in that it would be the club giving an admission of guilt on his behalf for a crime he wasn’t convicted of ? Just a ridiculous piece and an anti United shot without any proper thought process.

 

[Pickle85]

And yet the club declared they were satisfied he didn’t commit the offences he was charged with (which included assault and controlling behaviour). This was no doubt with the benefit of substantial expensive legal guidance as to the
merits. I regard it as utterly implausible that the club would lie about such a thing, just to try and protect a player’s value, so there is obviously more to the situation than it appears.

The reality is that this is someone who is innocent in the eyes of law and in the eyes of his club (at least of the offences he was charged with), who conducted a full investigation. It’s fine for people still not to want him back on the basis of the audio but the suggestion that people who think we should take him back are all DV apologists has to be taken in the context of our own club being satisfied that isn’t the case.

Why? In my mind it's absolutely plausible. In fact, if they're confident that the survivor isn't going to press ahead with their accusations then it's definitely in their interests to say they're confident he's not guilty. I'd turn the question around and ask why it would be in the club's best interests to do anything other than say that?

 

[van Nistelrooy]

Maybe, just maybe, there is more evidence.
Maybe this recording is a part of a larger recording that explains a lot.
Maybe Greenwood and ******* are silent, because they don't want a turn of events that will put HER in bad spotlight.
Maybe love conquers all.
Who the feck knows?

And no, I'm not saying this is the truth. I'm saying it's possible.
What bothers me is that a lot of posters here have already condemned Greenwood, 100% excluding the possibility that something didn't happen the way they imagine it did.


This picture speaks a lot to me.
We might never know the whole truth. But just think how the Johnny Depp - Amber Heard story unfolded. Until you know the whole truth, you can't condemn people.

But of course, everyone is free to think whatever they want to.

Good grief!

Is this Matt Le Tissier? The Conspiracy King? Apparently, videos of planes flying into the WTC buildings weren't evident enough for 9/11 to be true. It comes as no surprise that an audio recording of Greenwood threatening his partner and for her to plead with him to "stop raping me", is not deemed conclusive enough.

What further evidence are you suggesting? It was role-play, along with the bloodied and bruised photos? It would have been resolved with the police immediately.

I worry about the people we have in our fanbase and society.

 

[Fanatic 00237]

Why? In my mind it's absolutely plausible. In fact, if they're confident that the survivor isn't going to press ahead with their accusations then it's definitely in their interests to say they're confident he's not guilty. I'd turn the question around and ask why it would be in the club's best interests to do anything other than say that?

But what would make them to be that confident though? Unless they have some stonewall evidence, they can't/shouldn't take chances making such statements as it would backfire very badly if she does go ahead 12 months later after another incident and then brings back the other accusations previously laid against him. I'm sure the legal advisers would be wary of such a scenario, there is more at stake for the club if the gamble goes wrong, after all he is just the one young forward still in the early stages if his career. The club could find itself in serious trouble for trying to cover up the offender.

 

[united for life]

Joined in 2014? - check
Roughly 2000 posts? - check
Same tired argument? - check
Hyperbole claiming he's having his life ruined? - check

- yes
- yes
- yes, that is my point of view
- no, did i claim he’s having his life ruined?

 

[united for life]

It's violent domestic assault and attempted rape ffs, it's not a 'mistake'. Can people stop using that word?!

again, you and i do not know all the facts. Don’t ignore the evidence made public, fair enough. But also, don’t ignore other facts. We will never know the full details of what happened, but should rely on club statement made after an investigation

 

[united for life]

It's very possible that United's investigation didn't have access to some profound exonerating evidence, and simply that the statement is very cleverly worded PR. The club can not establish his guilt in a statement. Legally it's something they can't do.

Most of us have heard the recording, and in the absence of a better explanation for it, that's what we have. I'm not willing to accept 'but the club said' as sufficient to satisfy me of his innocence. If there's an explanation that genuinely negates the contents of the recording (and I can't imagine what that could even be, frankly), I'm not willing to take the club's word that it just exists and move on.

It is possible it did. Otherwise the club, with that statement, is misleading fans. I wouldn’t call that cleverly worded PR to be honest.

Otherwise, your opinion. Fair enough.

 

[K Stand Knut]

How the feck is this thread still open.

It’s embarrassing on so many levels.

Almost every post is fecking nuts

 

[AbusementPark]

I can’t access this but what’s the Telegraph’s thought process for why we have to sell him and not keep any of the money? Are we allowed to recoup the wages we’ve paid over the last few years for no benefit?

All the while the media and journos are profiting from running the story about Greenwood, maybe they should donate their revenue.

 

[Fanatic 00237]

And maybe they are performing mental gymnastics because he can kick a ball well.

In response to this in particular which keeps being brought up, contrary to the wide majority of United fans (in this forum and elsewhere), I was absolutely against the club bringing Ronaldo back partly due to past accusations laid against him in the US. It felt like his celebrity status had put him above the law and no one would dare reject him "because he can kick a ball well".

Fast-forward a few years later and we have MG who is accused of something similarly disgusting. I was as disgusted as everyone else when the news broke out. After a more in-depth process, he is allowed to return playing but this time the whole world wants him to be banned from ever playing again (I mean before Getafe came calling). Seriously, I think if Ronaldo could be forgiven (without apology nor sanction of any sort) and allowed to continue dominating world football, then MG (who was much younger at his time) deserves no less tolerance. And the accusation that some are defending him just because "he can kick a ball well" does not sit well for me. He isn't blowing off the roof at Getafe yet I wouldn't mind at all, if he can continue playing then why not at United, if the club wants him and he wants to come?

 

[golden_blunder]

if he’s going to play anywhere in the world, it might as well be us. I am afraid we are losing a very good player who can be an important part of our team for years. Read the united statement again. It says “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.”.

this seems to be ignored and we follow the hype that he should be sentenced for life.

he night have made a mistake, what it the level of his mistake? I dnt know. But as a young man, he should be given a chance to redeem himself and his future. Fairly.

“Mistake”

sorry I tripped and accidentally thumped you a few times, and bruised your legs as I tried to steady myself

how many times must be repeated, he’s living his 2nd chance to redeem right now

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

Why? In my mind it's absolutely plausible. In fact, if they're confident that the survivor isn't going to press ahead with their accusations then it's definitely in their interests to say they're confident he's not guilty. I'd turn the question around and ask why it would be in the club's best interests to do anything other than say that?

Because they'd be in a heaping shitstorm of trouble? The feck kind of question is this?

 

[Pickle85]

again, you and i do not know all the facts. Don’t ignore the evidence made public, fair enough. But also, don’t ignore other facts. We will never know the full details of what happened, but should rely on club statement made after an investigation

What other facts?

Because they'd be in a heaping shitstorm of trouble? The feck kind of question is this?

How? If the survivor has withdrawn and the charges have been dropped then how would they be in a 'heaping shitstorm of trouble', given that it's not going to be proven?

 

[Widow]

And?

You shouldn't need me to point it out

 

[Pickle85]

But what would make them to be that confident though? Unless they have some stonewall evidence, they can't/shouldn't take chances making such statements as it would backfire very badly if she does go ahead 12 months later after another incident and then brings back the other accusations previously laid against him. I'm sure the legal advisers would be wary of such a scenario, there is more at stake for the club if the gamble goes wrong, after all he is just the one young forward still in the early stages if his career. The club could find itself in serious trouble for trying to cover up the offender.

They would say that new evidence has come to light, which it would presumably have to for it to be recharged.