Jump to content

Mason Greenwood would you take him?

Streaky

By Streaky,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

LiberalCommunist

LiberalCommunist

Posted
Posted (edited)

Lee hughes & Luke McCormick served time in prison for causing death by dangerous driving, then managed to continue their football careers.

Mason Greenwood has no criminal prosecution to his name. But there is a recording of him saying some rather vile things to his partner. 

And yet the judicial axe seems to have cut him off completely, because of public opinion. 

Do we not follow the laws of the land anymore? Or are they just for guidance while the internet lords it over us?

What if there was no recording, but her friend witnessed the whole thing, would that be good enough?

Can we then condemn someone, with no chance of rehabilitation? Where is the line in the sand? Is doping and betting socially acceptable if you serve a ban, then you come back and can be cheered by a stadium full of supporters, but don't berate a disabled guy in Sainsbury's carpark if you are being recorded? Do we now a need rule book published?

No matter how repulsed by Mason's actions you are, would you not like some clarification on crime and punishment?

And lastly, if this guy is the monster we have all read about, then why is she still with him? Haven't they had a baby together? In fact, if she is such a victim, how did she have the intuitive instincts to record him and potentially send down her vile abuser? One can only imagine just how toxic that child's upbringing will be if I have even half the story right. 

Just to confirm, I have no dog in the race, I've never met Mason Greenwood. I've never been abusive to a partner or anyone for that matter. But the court of public opinion does leave me rather puzzled. 

Edited by LiberalCommunist
  • Like 8
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wadesmith

wadesmith

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, LiberalCommunist said:

Lee hughes & Luke McCormick served time in prison for causing death by dangerous driving, then managed to continue their football careers.

Mason Greenwood has no criminal prosecution to his name. But there is a recording of him saying some rather vile things to his partner. 

And yet the judicial axe seems to have cut him off completely, because of public opinion. 

Do we not follow the laws of the land anymore? Or are they just for guidance while the internet lords it over us?

What if there was no recording, but her friend witnessed the whole thing, would that be good enough?

Can we then condemn someone, with no chance of rehabilitation? Where is the line in the sand? Is doping and betting socially acceptable if you serve a ban, then you come back and can be cheered by a stadium full of supporters, but don't berate a disabled guy in Sainsbury's carpark if you are being recorded? Do we now a need rule book published?

No matter how repulsed by Mason's actions you are, would you not like some clarification on crime and punishment?

And lastly, if this guy is the monster we have all read about, then why is she still with him? Haven't they had a baby together? In fact, if she is such a victim, how did she have the intuitive instincts to record him and potentially send down her vile abuser? One can only imagine just how toxic that child's upbringing will be if I have even half the story right. 

Just to confirm, I have no dog in the race, I've never met Mason Greenwood. I've never been abusive to a partner or anyone for that matter. But the court of public opinion does leave me rather puzzled. 

Well I guess we know  where the line in the sand once someone signs him. I think we are following the laws of the land..there’s no law that says you have to keep a football player who you find morally repulsive, there may be an issue if under contract..but then Mason can seek legal advise if he wants to challenge that. I’m not sure what the problem is here? Manchester United no longer want Mason Greenwood for obvious reasons..Mason Greenwood appears to have accepted that..& currently no one has stepped in for him. I’m sure like the examples you use above,after a period he probably will play for someone. You mention his partner..well she may be just as bad as him..but she’s not the issue here so it doesn’t matter. I’m guessing you would be supportive of Southampton signing him? I personally wouldn’t, but that comes down to each individuals moral compass. You appear to be be a believer in giving him an immediate second chance which is actually admiral..I would be happy to see him never play football again. But I suspect many  people would side with you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_clark

Saint_clark

Posted
Posted
On 21/08/2023 at 17:26, Crab Lungs said:

Any ideas on where we think he’ll end up? 
 

Saudi, Cyprus, Russia?

Turkey or Italy would be my guesses. Relatively big leagues so can afford to pay him the sort of wage he'll want, and also places that haven't been shy about taking players with questionable morals in the past. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Gifford

Saint Gifford

Posted
Posted

There are hundreds of players out there that have been spat out by the academy system plying there trade where ever they can.

Why would you take on this baggage, because he played with decent players on billard tables. 

There are players out there at non league level without the crap at 16 17 18 years old. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Seemed to sneak out right on the deadline.

Fairly quiet in Spanish women's football at the moment, so I wonder what the reaction to this news will be. 🙂

Seems like pouring petrol on a fire to me if the Spanish media are anything like ours they will lap this up and rip the club to pieces.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_Ash

Saint_Ash

Posted
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

Seems like pouring petrol on a fire to me if the Spanish media are anything like ours they will lap this up and rip the club to pieces.

Until his first good game then I bet they forget about it. Especially if Getafe start winning with him in the team. 

 

Just read it's a loan deal and he'll go back to United next year, they really are hoping everyone forgets about his shit storm. They need to cut ties.

Edited by Saint_Ash
Link to comment
Share on other sites
a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Saint_Ash said:

Until his first good game then I bet they forget about it. Especially if Getafe start winning with him in the team. 

 

Just read it's a loan deal and he'll go back to United next year, they really are hoping everyone forgets about his shit storm. They need to cut ties.

It’s a loan deal because nobody in their right mind would commit to but him.  If he has a good season and reaction in Spain is muted then he will be sold in the summer. There is no way he ever plays for united again the media which hunt would be too much. The only reason they haven’t ditched him is that he potentially has a value and they are paying him two years wages regardless so they might as well chance their arm and wait for a return in investment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

It’s a loan deal because nobody in their right mind would commit to but him.  If he has a good season and reaction in Spain is muted then he will be sold in the summer. There is no way he ever plays for united again the media which hunt would be too much. The only reason they haven’t ditched him is that he potentially has a value and they are paying him two years wages regardless so they might as well chance their arm and wait for a return in investment.

When you say ditch him For what? (I know for what), but the CPS have dropped charges. You can't just 'ditch' people, as I am sure legally that is an issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites
a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

When you say ditch him For what? (I know for what), but the CPS have dropped charges. You can't just 'ditch' people, as I am sure legally that is an issue

Man Utd could pay up his contract and bonuses due and walk away from him having met their contractual commitment, I would hope if he was a saints player that is what the club would do rather than hanging on for a transfer fee or considering his return.  The CPS as you said dropped the charges but that doesn’t make him innocent just means there was not enough chance of a conviction I will happily laugh at anyone who tries to tell me he isn’t a scumbag of the highest order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Holmes_and_Watson

Holmes_and_Watson

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

Man Utd could pay up his contract and bonuses due and walk away from him having met their contractual commitment, I would hope if he was a saints player that is what the club would do rather than hanging on for a transfer fee or considering his return.  The CPS as you said dropped the charges but that doesn’t make him innocent just means there was not enough chance of a conviction I will happily laugh at anyone who tries to tell me he isn’t a scumbag of the highest order.

There could be legal implications if the club do that. Or simply that both couldn't agree to it.

Both parties have agreed that Greenwood's future is away from the club. But neither admits to any wrongdoing.

Greenwood stated " I did not do the things I was accused of, and in February I was cleared of all charges."

The club went even further, stating "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."

The club saying that not only was Greenwood cleared, but did not commit the offences and, not only that, what we saw/heard was somehow taken out of context from the wider picture.

Both parties may have agreed that Greenwood move on. But it's clear from the statements, neither think it's anything to do with wrongdoing. Both only admit "mistakes" were made.

Greenwood may see it in his interests to keep his lucrative manchester United contract going until the end, at which point, he can hope to find more forgetful clubs out there, while having played football at a good level until then.

Manchester United may see this as a way to have some of the wages of that lucrative contract paid for by another party.

Both will be happy it's far away from Old Trafford.

Had Manchester United acted to pay the contract up now 1) It may be perceived that there was wrongdoing, which both parties have said didn't happen and there would be a direct link form that to Greenwood's departure. 2) Greenwood would have been faced with finding a new club now, by himself, having been released by United as a result of his activities. He may not have agreed to/ liked any of that.

This way, he's had the support of the United recruitment department to find him a new home (and probably next season too) and he can leave at the end of his contract, a couple of years down the road, where he can hope memories have faded. Not immediately from United with a massive cloud over him.

Horrid. But the only thing these parties look out for is themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, a1ex2001 said:

Man Utd could pay up his contract and bonuses due and walk away from him having met their contractual commitment, I would hope if he was a saints player that is what the club would do rather than hanging on for a transfer fee or considering his return.  The CPS as you said dropped the charges but that doesn’t make him innocent just means there was not enough chance of a conviction I will happily laugh at anyone who tries to tell me he isn’t a scumbag of the highest order.

You can't just do that? Che could just say, nah, sod the last years' worth of wages, I am off to Everton for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wadesmith

wadesmith

Posted
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

You can't just do that? Che could just say, nah, sod the last years' worth of wages, I am off to Everton for nothing.

The poster said Man Utd pay off his contract. Your right Che cannot just forgoe the last year of his contract even if he waived his wages...but Saints could say ‘you’ve got one year left, here’s the 60k a week we owe you ( or whatever it is) off you go, which is what the poster was suggesting Man Utd might do.

Edited by wadesmith
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, wadesmith said:

The poster said Man Utd pay off his contract. Your right Che cannot just forgoe the last year of his contract even if he waived his wages...but Saints could say ‘you’ve got one year left, here’s the 60k a week we owe you ( or whatever it is) off you go, which is what the poster was suggesting Man Utd might do.

But both parties have to agree......legally, Greenwood has done nothing wrong, so it is far more complicated than saying "fuck off"

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

But both parties have to agree......legally, Greenwood has done nothing wrong, so it is far more complicated than saying "fuck off"

They could pay him for two two years to stay at home and agree to give him to any club who will have him for free instead of hoping to make money out of him.  There are many many ways they could deal with the scum bag and to say he has done nothing wrong is ridiculous I will accept he hasn’t been found guilty of a crime in court of law but it’s obvious to anyone with an ounce of sense he is a wrongun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
a1ex2001

a1ex2001

Posted
Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

There could be legal implications if the club do that. Or simply that both couldn't agree to it.

Both parties have agreed that Greenwood's future is away from the club. But neither admits to any wrongdoing.

Greenwood stated " I did not do the things I was accused of, and in February I was cleared of all charges."

The club went even further, stating "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."

The club saying that not only was Greenwood cleared, but did not commit the offences and, not only that, what we saw/heard was somehow taken out of context from the wider picture.

Both parties may have agreed that Greenwood move on. But it's clear from the statements, neither think it's anything to do with wrongdoing. Both only admit "mistakes" were made.

Greenwood may see it in his interests to keep his lucrative manchester United contract going until the end, at which point, he can hope to find more forgetful clubs out there, while having played football at a good level until then.

Manchester United may see this as a way to have some of the wages of that lucrative contract paid for by another party.

Both will be happy it's far away from Old Trafford.

Had Manchester United acted to pay the contract up now 1) It may be perceived that there was wrongdoing, which both parties have said didn't happen and there would be a direct link form that to Greenwood's departure. 2) Greenwood would have been faced with finding a new club now, by himself, having been released by United as a result of his activities. He may not have agreed to/ liked any of that.

This way, he's had the support of the United recruitment department to find him a new home (and probably next season too) and he can leave at the end of his contract, a couple of years down the road, where he can hope memories have faded. Not immediately from United with a massive cloud over him.

Horrid. But the only thing these parties look out for is themselves.

He wasn’t cleared of anything that is an abuse of language, the CPS decided that they didn’t have a realistic chance of a conviction following the loss of a key witness.  Even if he had gone to court he would only ever be fount not guilty no court in the us country finds someone innocent.

mo’s love to read uniteds internal report on this surely it would be in both the club and greenwood’s interests to publish it if it clearly shows that he did no wrong?

Edited by a1ex2001
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Holmes_and_Watson

Holmes_and_Watson

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, a1ex2001 said:

They could pay him for two two years to stay at home and agree to give him to any club who will have him for free instead of hoping to make money out of him.  There are many many ways they could deal with the scum bag and to say he has done nothing wrong is ridiculous I will accept he hasn’t been found guilty of a crime in court of law but it’s obvious to anyone with an ounce of sense he is a wrongun.

It seems that they couldn't even get shot of him due to reputational damage.

Witness drops out and there's no realistic chance of confession. His employer have said " 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."

If his own employer is saying the offences weren't commited by Greenwood. And what was released was out of context, according to their findings. Then Greenwood would be advised that he had recourse to wonder why he was being effectively dumped, even at full pay.

As unpleasant as it is, both parties would realise the further damage legal action would cause, and have come to this arrangement.

There will be rug at Old Trafford, with a tell tale bump in it, showing where their internal report was swept. Neither party will want that to see the light of day.

Greenwood admits "mistakes" in his statement about what he would like us to believe his values are. The club have found a loan solution. I read Getafe are paying a minimal amount of the wages. Another year of that, and he will be off their minds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...