The Athletic has just published further details, revealing the extent to which the club was preparing for the announcement of Greenwood's return to the squad.
"Manchester United’s plan to bring back Mason Greenwood was so advanced that the club even prepared documents outlining the type of images that should be taken of the player during training sessions and planned how manager Erik ten Hag should handle questions during an anticipated media storm.
According to sources with knowledge of United’s planning, who remain anonymous because they are not authorised to speak publicly, the club’s preparations for Greenwood’s return also included an assessment of the expected sentiment of external figures, listing individual football pundits, journalists and politicians and stating whether they would be for or against Greenwood’s reintegration. The planning divided these people into categories to the effect of “supportive", “open-minded" or “hostile". The club’s document listed a series of domestic abuse charities assumed to be “hostile"."
I have to say, the club's leadership comes across in a remarkably cynical light. Having a blind spot to the implications of the decision is one thing. Understanding how much anguish it would create and why, but proceeding in any case, and planning on how to ride out the media storm / respond to 'hostile' parties such as domestic abuse charities is another. Motherfиckers.
It's usually the case that most people in an organisation are decent, and at least the following provides a chink of light to the story - and some hope that the blowback is causing Arnold to think again:
"The Athletic has also been told by sources close to the club, who will remain anonymous in order to protect their positions, that senior Manchester United executives held multiple intense meetings with staff after we reported on Wednesday that some employees feel ashamed by the club’s decision. Some staff members have discussed resigning in the event United continue to pursue the plan laid out by Arnold, while others have considered coordinated action, with some staff even exploring a strike."
Full story here: https://theathletic.com/4786779/2023/08/18/mason-greenwood-manchester-united-charities/
More details on Greenwood return
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 hours, 6 minutes ago
By the way, the club has emphasised the importance of pastoral care for years, and as far as I can see most of the academy products we've turned out have been pretty well rounded individuals. Developing into a professional footballer necessitates going through a hugely competitive, pressurised environment from an early age. That's a lot of strain on any human being. The fact that most of them turn out emotionally balanced is pretty much proof that our club, and others, put a lot of effort into their psychological welfare.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll suggest you read up on the chaos involved in managing a young superstar talent at a young age. Every other one you are referring to had a normal youth, their speed of development were average. Many did not get a multimillion contract at 18 and constantly analysed, criticised, dismissed even. And trust me every one of them sees it on social media. Let's talk less to their involvement with women at that age with that popularity. Take a look at child stars for example. We cannot call them the same with a normal player. I support loans for young player one reason; the difference in atmosphere. We can't teach that as trainers.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Clockwork Red: With or Wout You (U4892)
posted 14 minutes ago
I remembered the dog issue with west ham.
__________
Not very well, since it was a cat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lmao it was a cat? I reserve my comments
posted on 19/8/23
Rumours mounting of club U-turn
posted on 19/8/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 30 minutes ago
Rumours mounting of club U-turn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where you hearing that?
posted on 19/8/23
Twitter: some United journalists
posted on 19/8/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
Twitter: some United journalists
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting
posted on 19/8/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 47 minutes ago
Rumours mounting of club U-turn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Honestly the people running the show are pathetic. More and more the off-the-record briefings about an impending announcement look like an exercise in testing the waters (clumsily throwing the women's team under the bus in the process).
They were clearly planning to bring him back, so must have been preparing or have some reasons (hopefully good ones, given they've been mulling over this for six months) and will have understood there was/is an expectation that those reasons would be clearly stated.
For them to backtrack either means that they haven't got the courage of their convictions to stand by whatever led them to opt for reinstatement, or that they literally didn't have any remotely justifiable reasons to bring him back and were never intending to give any in the first place (which was my reading between the lines when they mentioned the "anonymity of the alleged victim" in their statement).
posted on 19/8/23
I'm sure people will criticse the club for an apparent u-turn however I think that's still preferable to going ahead with getting Greenwood back. Still a terrible state of affairs though of course.
What a mess!
posted on 19/8/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 7 minutes ago
I'm sure people will criticse the club for an apparent u-turn however I think that's still preferable to going ahead with getting Greenwood back. Still a terrible state of affairs though of course.
What a mess!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the club had concluded that they had strong enough reasons to reinstate him, then they should be sticking to their decision and showing those workings out. If the fanbase and wider community feel those reasons are simply not good enough, then the backlash would continue, but with the benefit of some extra knowledge than what is currently in the public domain. Personally I'd just prefer to know what they uncovered in the last 6 months. I'm giving the club the benefit of the doubt in assuming that there was enough mitigating evidence to go down the reinstatement route.
But if the club didn't really have any reasons other than "he's a good player who scores goals and we need one", and they were still going to try and bring him back, they're a disgrace.
posted on 19/8/23
Personally I'd just prefer to know what they uncovered in the last 6 months.
----------------------------------------
I think they spent the last six months planning the best way to bring him back.