Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
comment by Christ We Won (U17162)
posted 2 minutes ago
Mostly RDD arguing with everyone but still
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not on my articles!
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 15 seconds ago
Both my cousins were always in trouble with the law drug dealing, robbing etc. Made my aunt's life a misery. My Dad constantly told her to let them go (they would be the same age as me now if still alive) and not take them back into their home. She always did and always ended up hurt.
I've no doubt my Dad would have chucked me out too had I been like them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but had they been forced to face the consequences the first time with some proper discipline then they may not have escalated either.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Christ We Won (U17162)
posted 2 minutes ago
Mostly RDD arguing with everyone but still
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not on my articles!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Very good to hear
I've always had a lot of sympathy with the decision Utd have to make on Greenwood. There's no good option here, no right decision, but rather a case of picking the least wrong one.
That said, if you're describing domestic abuse charities as 'hostiles' then the club management really need to take a long hard look at themselves. I know there's context but honestly, that's appalling.
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 15 seconds ago
Both my cousins were always in trouble with the law drug dealing, robbing etc. Made my aunt's life a misery. My Dad constantly told her to let them go (they would be the same age as me now if still alive) and not take them back into their home. She always did and always ended up hurt.
I've no doubt my Dad would have chucked me out too had I been like them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but had they been forced to face the consequences the first time with some proper discipline then they may not have escalated either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not saying there shouldn't be punishment. There should but would you dad let you go after the first time after punishing you? I pretty sure the answer to that is no.
Mason has lost 2 years of his career. Maybe even his whole career (might never be the same player again). I think that in it itself is a heavy price!
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to find Jesus
Tomatoes, I'd question your assumption that staying at United is inherently better for Greenwood. It's all conjecture, but there's a world in which the protective PR of the club and return to football encourages him to believe he was the victim of this process, he doesn't learn from it, and, god forbid, the things we heard happen again. There's a world in which losing his job forces him to confront the implications of what he did and provides the impetus for genuine remorse and growth. We're not in a position to say what is best for Greenwood.
But while I do want him to rehabilitate and to go forth as a better man and lead a rewarding life, I'm more concerned with the implications of this for the victims of domestic abuse and people trapped in coercive and dangerous relationships. Because the way the club handles this will continue to make big waves in our discourse, and I think it's clear that many people will be influenced by a message from the club that either 'we don't tolerate this' or 'yes, we tolerate this' and the associated framing of Greenwood as kind of a victim of the situation. To use your words: "Now if you don't care about that... I do."
comment by Naby8 (U6997)
posted 21 seconds ago
I've always had a lot of sympathy with the decision Utd have to make on Greenwood. There's no good option here, no right decision, but rather a case of picking the least wrong one.
That said, if you're describing domestic abuse charities as 'hostiles' then the club management really need to take a long hard look at themselves. I know there's context but honestly, that's appalling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Honestly the Glazers need to go. I dont know how but the way our talented youngsters seem to waste their potential with us somehow ends with them. At this point it's only Rashford who has come out even above average. We have multiple youth cups, plenty talented youngsters. Nothing. I support United because of the 96,97 youths. That is why united has not won a league title almost (and may never win in the next 10) and is still the biggest club in the world. They cannot be removed and it irritates me to no end.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
———————————————-
I can’t view the full article and have no idea of the credibility of the journo, but what if he has used a little poetic licence and replaced the words for, don’t know, against for supportive, open minded and hostile ?
In my view that would be a different situation.
I don’t subscribe to the athletic so not sure if they’re the type of outlet that would spice up a quote.
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 33 seconds ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Bãleš left boot-e-cog-lou (U22081)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 41 seconds ago
The easy decision would just be to terminate Greenwood's contract and be done with it.
I think the fact that they are willing to go through this potentially difficult (and perilous for their jobs) reintegration process suggests they know a lot more about the case than we do and are willing to give the lad a path forward.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It doesn't suggest that at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to know how it suggests that too. All I think it is all about is that he's a multi million pound 'asset'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How much more does the club stand to lose in lost sponsorship deals and public opinion? I would say if far outweighs and residual value he might have.
I personally don't think this is a valid argument. There is almost no upside for us keeping Greenwood except for the fact that the lad is Man United family and you give family as second chance.
For those who have kids. I've seen the question one here about "if that was your daughter". How about if Mason was your son. He made this mistake (allegedly) and was remorseful. Would could disown him and cut him off completely, or would help him rebuild his life to become a better person.
That's the decision United have had to make... Just like any parent, United has to have some sense of shared responsibility for his actions, they had a major hand in his upbringing after all. As such the club should be open to his rehabilitation (assuming one is needed, we don't know the full story, all judgement is being passed based on a recording with no context)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to think parents of boys on here would be horrified and would tell their son he's brought it all on himself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United aren't his parents. He has real parents.
The recording is of him abusing and threatening his partner, that's never been denied.
I expect his parents to stand by him.
Short of him being exonerated I expect the club to sell him or end his contract.
comment by Robb Matilda (U22716)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to find Jesus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read a bible. "He who is without sin, cast the first stone"
An interview with Greenwood by Piers Morgan is possibly one the daftest senarios I have heard on here regarding this matter. And that is saying something.
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 15 seconds ago
Both my cousins were always in trouble with the law drug dealing, robbing etc. Made my aunt's life a misery. My Dad constantly told her to let them go (they would be the same age as me now if still alive) and not take them back into their home. She always did and always ended up hurt.
I've no doubt my Dad would have chucked me out too had I been like them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but had they been forced to face the consequences the first time with some proper discipline then they may not have escalated either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not saying there shouldn't be punishment. There should but would you dad let you go after the first time after punishing you? I pretty sure the answer to that is no.
Mason has lost 2 years of his career. Maybe even his whole career (might never be the same player again). I think that in it itself is a heavy price!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think he would well have done.
However, let's presume he wouldn't have. In that scenario he certainly wouldn't have entertained me being hard done by if my employers sacked me.
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Robb Matilda (U22716)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to find Jesus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read a bible. "He who is without sin, cast the first stone"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed...
They be throwing boulders here on 606
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Robb Matilda (U22716)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to find Jesus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read a bible. "He who is without sin, cast the first stone"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What about ‘an eye for an eye’?
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
-----------
Assuming an offence was indeed committed, how do we know it's his first offence?
comment by Clockwork Red: With or Wout You (U4892)
posted 6 seconds ago
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
-----------
Assuming an offence was indeed committed, how do we know it's his first offence?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly the point... none of us know the full details of this, yet we are all quick to pass judgment. Yet people with more information have refrained (for whatever reason) for passing judgement...
I wouldn't really trust the bible all that much with anything. After all it details how all the animal of the world were able to fit on a ship and also featured a talking snake and a virgin birth. Oh, and people coming back from the dead!
What would be good is if the internal investigation focused on the 'family' environment they've created for this product of the system to end up acting like this. As others have said, there's a certain responsibility on the club's behalf to turn out decent people as well as footballers.
If were a United fan (and I'm not) I'd be more concerned about the implications of the culture at the club rather than this one guy who wasn't your generational talent anyway and will probably end up getting released and not playing in the PL again.
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 48 seconds ago
I wouldn't really trust the bible all that much with anything. After all it details how all the animal of the world were able to fit on a ship and also featured a talking snake and a virgin birth. Oh, and people coming back from the dead!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just 2 of each creature on earth Diafol.
But I agree it Cpt Noah would have 'gonna need a bigger boat'.
Based on what I’ve seen I can’t see how he can play again. That being said, is there supposedly evidence that hasn’t been made public that they could be basing the decision off of?
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 48 seconds ago
I wouldn't really trust the bible all that much with anything. After all it details how all the animal of the world were able to fit on a ship and also featured a talking snake and a virgin birth. Oh, and people coming back from the dead!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just 2 of each creature on earth Diafol.
But I agree it Cpt Noah would have 'gonna need a bigger boat'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Much, much bigger. And also an intricate plan to only place certain fossils in certain parts of the world!
Sign in if you want to comment
More details on Greenwood return
Page 4 of 6
6
posted on 18/8/23
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Christ We Won (U17162)
posted 2 minutes ago
Mostly RDD arguing with everyone but still
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not on my articles!
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 15 seconds ago
Both my cousins were always in trouble with the law drug dealing, robbing etc. Made my aunt's life a misery. My Dad constantly told her to let them go (they would be the same age as me now if still alive) and not take them back into their home. She always did and always ended up hurt.
I've no doubt my Dad would have chucked me out too had I been like them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but had they been forced to face the consequences the first time with some proper discipline then they may not have escalated either.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Christ We Won (U17162)
posted 2 minutes ago
Mostly RDD arguing with everyone but still
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not on my articles!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Very good to hear
posted on 18/8/23
I've always had a lot of sympathy with the decision Utd have to make on Greenwood. There's no good option here, no right decision, but rather a case of picking the least wrong one.
That said, if you're describing domestic abuse charities as 'hostiles' then the club management really need to take a long hard look at themselves. I know there's context but honestly, that's appalling.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 15 seconds ago
Both my cousins were always in trouble with the law drug dealing, robbing etc. Made my aunt's life a misery. My Dad constantly told her to let them go (they would be the same age as me now if still alive) and not take them back into their home. She always did and always ended up hurt.
I've no doubt my Dad would have chucked me out too had I been like them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but had they been forced to face the consequences the first time with some proper discipline then they may not have escalated either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not saying there shouldn't be punishment. There should but would you dad let you go after the first time after punishing you? I pretty sure the answer to that is no.
Mason has lost 2 years of his career. Maybe even his whole career (might never be the same player again). I think that in it itself is a heavy price!
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to find Jesus
posted on 18/8/23
Tomatoes, I'd question your assumption that staying at United is inherently better for Greenwood. It's all conjecture, but there's a world in which the protective PR of the club and return to football encourages him to believe he was the victim of this process, he doesn't learn from it, and, god forbid, the things we heard happen again. There's a world in which losing his job forces him to confront the implications of what he did and provides the impetus for genuine remorse and growth. We're not in a position to say what is best for Greenwood.
But while I do want him to rehabilitate and to go forth as a better man and lead a rewarding life, I'm more concerned with the implications of this for the victims of domestic abuse and people trapped in coercive and dangerous relationships. Because the way the club handles this will continue to make big waves in our discourse, and I think it's clear that many people will be influenced by a message from the club that either 'we don't tolerate this' or 'yes, we tolerate this' and the associated framing of Greenwood as kind of a victim of the situation. To use your words: "Now if you don't care about that... I do."
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Naby8 (U6997)
posted 21 seconds ago
I've always had a lot of sympathy with the decision Utd have to make on Greenwood. There's no good option here, no right decision, but rather a case of picking the least wrong one.
That said, if you're describing domestic abuse charities as 'hostiles' then the club management really need to take a long hard look at themselves. I know there's context but honestly, that's appalling.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Honestly the Glazers need to go. I dont know how but the way our talented youngsters seem to waste their potential with us somehow ends with them. At this point it's only Rashford who has come out even above average. We have multiple youth cups, plenty talented youngsters. Nothing. I support United because of the 96,97 youths. That is why united has not won a league title almost (and may never win in the next 10) and is still the biggest club in the world. They cannot be removed and it irritates me to no end.
posted on 18/8/23
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
———————————————-
I can’t view the full article and have no idea of the credibility of the journo, but what if he has used a little poetic licence and replaced the words for, don’t know, against for supportive, open minded and hostile ?
In my view that would be a different situation.
I don’t subscribe to the athletic so not sure if they’re the type of outlet that would spice up a quote.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 33 seconds ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by Bãleš left boot-e-cog-lou (U22081)
posted 41 seconds ago
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 41 seconds ago
The easy decision would just be to terminate Greenwood's contract and be done with it.
I think the fact that they are willing to go through this potentially difficult (and perilous for their jobs) reintegration process suggests they know a lot more about the case than we do and are willing to give the lad a path forward.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It doesn't suggest that at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to know how it suggests that too. All I think it is all about is that he's a multi million pound 'asset'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How much more does the club stand to lose in lost sponsorship deals and public opinion? I would say if far outweighs and residual value he might have.
I personally don't think this is a valid argument. There is almost no upside for us keeping Greenwood except for the fact that the lad is Man United family and you give family as second chance.
For those who have kids. I've seen the question one here about "if that was your daughter". How about if Mason was your son. He made this mistake (allegedly) and was remorseful. Would could disown him and cut him off completely, or would help him rebuild his life to become a better person.
That's the decision United have had to make... Just like any parent, United has to have some sense of shared responsibility for his actions, they had a major hand in his upbringing after all. As such the club should be open to his rehabilitation (assuming one is needed, we don't know the full story, all judgement is being passed based on a recording with no context)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to think parents of boys on here would be horrified and would tell their son he's brought it all on himself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
United aren't his parents. He has real parents.
The recording is of him abusing and threatening his partner, that's never been denied.
I expect his parents to stand by him.
Short of him being exonerated I expect the club to sell him or end his contract.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Robb Matilda (U22716)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to find Jesus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read a bible. "He who is without sin, cast the first stone"
posted on 18/8/23
An interview with Greenwood by Piers Morgan is possibly one the daftest senarios I have heard on here regarding this matter. And that is saying something.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Onana_banana_fi_fa_fofana (U20611)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 15 seconds ago
Both my cousins were always in trouble with the law drug dealing, robbing etc. Made my aunt's life a misery. My Dad constantly told her to let them go (they would be the same age as me now if still alive) and not take them back into their home. She always did and always ended up hurt.
I've no doubt my Dad would have chucked me out too had I been like them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but had they been forced to face the consequences the first time with some proper discipline then they may not have escalated either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not saying there shouldn't be punishment. There should but would you dad let you go after the first time after punishing you? I pretty sure the answer to that is no.
Mason has lost 2 years of his career. Maybe even his whole career (might never be the same player again). I think that in it itself is a heavy price!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think he would well have done.
However, let's presume he wouldn't have. In that scenario he certainly wouldn't have entertained me being hard done by if my employers sacked me.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Robb Matilda (U22716)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to find Jesus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read a bible. "He who is without sin, cast the first stone"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed...
They be throwing boulders here on 606
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Robb Matilda (U22716)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Redastomatoes- Feels very Moyesian...cleverson forever!If he is good enough he is ready! (U12026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 15 seconds ago
Newsflash:
Manchester United isn't a criminal behaviour rehabilitation organisation. This is not among its core competences. It isn't a family, with an interpersonal support structure based on lifelong individual bonds. It's a large commercial organisation operating in a cut-throat business, which of course has a special duty of care to the minors participating in its academy and normal, statutorily-defined duty of care to its adult employees.
Manchester United is not responsible for Greenwood's behaviour, nor for his rehabilitation. He is an employee. He's a very wealthy man as a result of his contractual relationship with the club, and if he chooses to get help, he has the means to get the very best professional support available.
But let's just say he needs the club to facilitate his rehabilitation. Does anyone have confidence that an organisation which put in place media management plans that defined domestic abuse charities as hostiles has the motivation or ability to reform Greenwood's character, ensure he frankly confronts and rejects his past? I certainly don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What glazers intent in all this is mute to me. Tbh, my position in this is all other people, including you is emotional. I am worried about Mason, I was worried about Ravel, I'm worried about Garnacho (a superstar with a young woman and piles of money, at 18!).
Mason is now married with child. His wife stayed. She married a superstar too. What happens when that changes? I'll never see sacking them now will be the best for him. Every single multimillion signing we make can leave like that. They'll get something new. But if we do this to Mason, he wont. You know it. Now if you dont care about that... I do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You need to find Jesus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read a bible. "He who is without sin, cast the first stone"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What about ‘an eye for an eye’?
posted on 18/8/23
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
-----------
Assuming an offence was indeed committed, how do we know it's his first offence?
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Clockwork Red: With or Wout You (U4892)
posted 6 seconds ago
But here this are repeat offenders... With no remorse for their actions... We are talking about a first-time offender here... Would you dad have thrown you our the first time you did this? Highly unlikely...
Fool me twice... then yeah, you wouldn't here a pip from me...
-----------
Assuming an offence was indeed committed, how do we know it's his first offence?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly the point... none of us know the full details of this, yet we are all quick to pass judgment. Yet people with more information have refrained (for whatever reason) for passing judgement...
posted on 18/8/23
I wouldn't really trust the bible all that much with anything. After all it details how all the animal of the world were able to fit on a ship and also featured a talking snake and a virgin birth. Oh, and people coming back from the dead!
posted on 18/8/23
What would be good is if the internal investigation focused on the 'family' environment they've created for this product of the system to end up acting like this. As others have said, there's a certain responsibility on the club's behalf to turn out decent people as well as footballers.
If were a United fan (and I'm not) I'd be more concerned about the implications of the culture at the club rather than this one guy who wasn't your generational talent anyway and will probably end up getting released and not playing in the PL again.
posted on 18/8/23
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 48 seconds ago
I wouldn't really trust the bible all that much with anything. After all it details how all the animal of the world were able to fit on a ship and also featured a talking snake and a virgin birth. Oh, and people coming back from the dead!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just 2 of each creature on earth Diafol.
But I agree it Cpt Noah would have 'gonna need a bigger boat'.
posted on 18/8/23
Based on what I’ve seen I can’t see how he can play again. That being said, is there supposedly evidence that hasn’t been made public that they could be basing the decision off of?
posted on 18/8/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 48 seconds ago
I wouldn't really trust the bible all that much with anything. After all it details how all the animal of the world were able to fit on a ship and also featured a talking snake and a virgin birth. Oh, and people coming back from the dead!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just 2 of each creature on earth Diafol.
But I agree it Cpt Noah would have 'gonna need a bigger boat'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Much, much bigger. And also an intricate plan to only place certain fossils in certain parts of the world!
posted on 18/8/23
100
Page 4 of 6
6