Mason Greenwood

[dylanisabaddog 5,031]

What an astonishing thread. Please be careful what you say because the host of this site will have no option but to delete you. And of course it may be that they'll think it's really not worth the effort and scrap the site altogether. 

Someone has been silly enough to mention Ched Evans. He was found not guilty. He was originally found guilty because a Judge ruled that the sexual history of the accuser couldn't be considered. The legal team representing Evans appealed on the basis that the evidence referred to her history of behaviour during sex. Evans said that the accuser had asked him to perform an unusual and very specific sex act and argued that women being raped tend not to tell the rapist how to do it. The defence was approached by another man who told them he had experienced exactly the same thing with the same woman. It's not clear why she chose to accuse Evans and not the other man (who wasn't a footballer). 

As for Greenwood, he undoubtedly said some horrible things but was it just a game? How do you know one way or another? 

Thirty years ago a woman with whom I'd had a short sexual relationship asked me to burst into her bedroom wearing a mask and pretend to rape her. I had the good sense to go home. The strange thing was that she was extremely intelligent and articulate but she just happened to be turned on in unusual ways. Although I've subsequently been told that rape victim isn't considered to be an unusual fettish. 

Before you reach your judgement make sure you have all the facts. We won't get them in this case. 

Man Utd is now in a difficult position. If they sack him they'll have to pay off his contract. They'll be damned if they do that and damned if they don't. 

[Greavsy 2,464]

1 minute ago, Ernie Wise said:

Yes, that’s the one.

Thanks from Fred Flintstone!👍

np, Ernie Wise, Fred Flintstone ,and a Benny Hill reference too. 

Can I raise you a Ronnie Barker, Hong Kong Phooey, and **** Emery!? 

The youth on here will be going "who!"

 

[TheBaldOne66 703]

It’s the typical thing to judge without knowing ALL the facts, just a snippet of a transcript is hardly the facts.

There are two sides to every story and whilst I’m not condoning what happened in anyway, people shouldn’t judge too quickly. 
 

It’s a very difficult subject to have an opinion on, many times it’s somebody trying to spite someone, if it isn’t true the. The accuser should be tried for false accusations. 

[Greavsy 2,464]

2 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

What an astonishing thread. Please be careful what you say because the host of this site will have no option but to delete you. And of course it may be that they'll think it's really not worth the effort and scrap the site altogether. 

Someone has been silly enough to mention Ched Evans. He was found not guilty. He was originally found guilty because a Judge ruled that the sexual history of the accuser couldn't be considered. The legal team representing Evans appealed on the basis that the evidence referred to her history of behaviour during sex. Evans said that the accuser had asked him to perform an unusual and very specific sex act and argued that women being raped tend not to tell the rapist how to do it. The defence was approached by another man who told them he had experienced exactly the same thing with the same woman. It's not clear why she chose to accuse Evans and not the other man (who wasn't a footballer). 

As for Greenwood, he undoubtedly said some horrible things but was it just a game? How do you know one way or another? 

Thirty years ago a woman with whom I'd had a short sexual relationship asked me to burst into her bedroom wearing a mask and pretend to rape her. I had the good sense to go home. The strange thing was that she was extremely intelligent and articulate but she just happened to be turned on in unusual ways. Although I've subsequently been told that rape victim isn't considered to be an unusual fettish. 

Before you reach your judgement make sure you have all the facts. We won't get them in this case. 

Man Utd is now in a difficult position. If they sack him they'll have to pay off his contract. They'll be damned if they do that and damned if they don't. 

Well said Dylan. 

You can only assume the accuser in the Evans case went for him due to his being a footballer and being wealthier than the other person.

Maybe she also thought he may gave considered paying her off to avoid the bad press. Who knows her motives? 

[Ernie Wise 73]

6 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

np, Ernie Wise, Fred Flintstone ,and a Benny Hill reference too. 

Can I raise you a Ronnie Barker, Hong Kong Phooey, and **** Emery!? 

The youth on here will be going "who!"

 

I’ll raise you an “oh, missus’ Frankie Howerd and,how about this one, Arthur Haynes!!

[Greavsy 2,464]

Just now, Ernie Wise said:

I’ll raise you an “oh, missus’ Frankie Howerd and,how about this one, Arthur Haynes!!

"Titter ye not" followed by a Sid James guffaw! 

Was good to see Melvyn Hayes on "not going out" recently too.

 

[Norfolk Dan 308]

I like simple. 

Would you invite Mason over for tea and biscuits with you and the other half? 

 

[Nexus_Canary 1,028]

Innocent until proven guilty and people are writing off a man who is "innocent" in the eyes of the law.

 

Im not saying he did not commit the crime or that hes a plesant human being, im playing devils advocate and saying there is enough prejudice around before we start deeming people guilty of a crime they have not been convicted of.

I personally wouldn't want him here for the media attention and the fact he will get hell from the terraces ( "you know what you are, you know what you are, Marlon King, you know what you are" ring any bells?) 

Edited August 12, 2023 by Nexus_Canary

[Branston Pickle 3,709]

11 minutes ago, Norfolk Dan said:

I like simple. 

Would you invite Mason over for tea and biscuits with you and the other half? 

 

I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t accept the invite - but  give it a go!

[dylanisabaddog 5,031]

14 minutes ago, Norfolk Dan said:

I like simple. 

Would you invite Mason over for tea and biscuits with you and the other half? 

 

That's taking simple to a whole new level. 

 

[lake district canary 4,552]

20 minutes ago, Norfolk Dan said:

Would you invite Mason over for tea and biscuits with you and the other half?

No, he might dunk his biscuit without asking if it was acceptable........

[dylanisabaddog 5,031]

1 hour ago, splutcho said:

I see the point you're making but whether or not I want him playing for our club isn't a legal matter it's a moral one.

Out of interest, where do you draw the line on the behaviour of players off the pitch? 

[cambridgeshire canary 6,835]

48 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

No, he might dunk his biscuit without asking if it was acceptable........

I really should not laugh at this

[splutcho 176]

10 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Out of interest, where do you draw the line on the behaviour of players off the pitch? 

Somewhere around being recorded sexually assaulting people. This isn't a controversial opinion.

[CDMullins 446]

2 hours ago, NFN FC said:

He only got away with it when the witness stepped down. I wonder why she did that? 

What happened to Police/CPS prosecuting without a victim?

Sure it use to happen when all the women would accuse their men of domestic violence on a Sunday morning then drop the case on a Monday evening.

Also, there's absolutely no link to this and Ched Evans IMO.

[CDMullins 446]

1 hour ago, Greavsy said:

Well said Dylan. 

You can only assume the accuser in the Evans case went for him due to his being a footballer and being wealthier than the other person.

Maybe she also thought he may gave considered paying her off to avoid the bad press. Who knows her motives? 

Yes,

In texts sent to her friend she said "When I get my big win, I'm going to buy a Mini and take you on holiday"

Clearly chasing the P's.

[wcorkcanary 4,354]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

What an astonishing thread. Please be careful what you say because the host of this site will have no option but to delete you. And of course it may be that they'll think it's really not worth the effort and scrap the site altogether. 

Someone has been silly enough to mention Ched Evans. He was found not guilty. He was originally found guilty because a Judge ruled that the sexual history of the accuser couldn't be considered. The legal team representing Evans appealed on the basis that the evidence referred to her history of behaviour during sex. Evans said that the accuser had asked him to perform an unusual and very specific sex act and argued that women being raped tend not to tell the rapist how to do it. The defence was approached by another man who told them he had experienced exactly the same thing with the same woman. It's not clear why she chose to accuse Evans and not the other man (who wasn't a footballer). 

As for Greenwood, he undoubtedly said some horrible things but was it just a game? How do you know one way or another? 

Thirty years ago a woman with whom I'd had a short sexual relationship asked me to burst into her bedroom wearing a mask and pretend to rape her. I had the good sense to go home. The strange thing was that she was extremely intelligent and articulate but she just happened to be turned on in unusual ways. Although I've subsequently been told that rape victim isn't considered to be an unusual fettish. 

Before you reach your judgement make sure you have all the facts. We won't get them in this case. 

Man Utd is now in a difficult position. If they sack him they'll have to pay off his contract. They'll be damned if they do that and damned if they don't. 

Man u have lost more on Harry Maguire than they ever will on Mason Greenwood..... but, he was/ is v quick with an eye for goal, personally I'd ignore his value as a footballer and consider instead his values as a human being . 

A friend suggested The  ' Role playing ' excuse... funnily enough a man u fan, his opinion was not guilty so therefore he plays for them.  Me , I'm not so sure , if I ran Man U  , I'd just pay him the minimum allowed and kiss him goodbye. Keeping him could seriously damage the Club Brand and reputation  ( ah feckit make him Captain then... ABU*) 

* Anyone But United. 

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

I’m not that familiar with the details of the case but our legal system works on an innocent unless proven guilty basis. I find it amazing that people are so quick to throw stones at others especially when they don’t know the entire detail of the case. Yes I’ve seen the supposed transcript posted but as mentioned by others we don’t know the context of this and also why someone would have set up recording equipment prior to this which seems too coincidental. As far as I’m concerned unless he’s proven guilty I hope is able to resume his career. 

[Capt. Pants 4,300]

13 minutes ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

I’m not that familiar with the details of the case but our legal system works on an innocent unless proven guilty basis. I find it amazing that people are so quick to throw stones at others especially when they don’t know the entire detail of the case. Yes I’ve seen the supposed transcript posted but as mentioned by others we don’t know the context of this and also why someone would have set up recording equipment prior to this which seems too coincidental. As far as I’m concerned unless he’s proven guilty I hope is able to resume his career. 

All well and good, but the point of this thread is would you want him at NCFC?

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

Just now, Capt. Pants said:

All well and good, but the point of this thread is would you want him at NCFC?

As he’s still classed as innocent I’d be fine with it. I don’t think football fans are the moral arbiters of society. You are talking about fans who can’t even be allowed to sit amongst each other for fear of violence when just about every other professional sport has unsegregated seating. I think if you go down the moral rabbit hole with football where do you draw the line. The people who are allowed in the ground to watch? Statistically 1 in 3 people have a conviction of some sort. Almost all the worst violence I’ve seen in person has come from so called football fans 

[Richard Richard 186]

10 minutes ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

As he’s still classed as innocent I’d be fine with it. I don’t think football fans are the moral arbiters of society. You are talking about fans who can’t even be allowed to sit amongst each other for fear of violence when just about every other professional sport has unsegregated seating. I think if you go down the moral rabbit hole with football where do you draw the line. The people who are allowed in the ground to watch? Statistically 1 in 3 people have a conviction of some sort. Almost all the worst violence I’ve seen in person has come from so called football fans 

I won't get involved in the hypothetical should we/shouldn't we argument about Greenwood but fair play for posting your stance on it.

Rest of your post makes some excellent, relevant points.

[Greavsy 2,464]

3 hours ago, Kenny Foggo said:

No I'd not want him at our club. He has no convictions but only because the woman he attacked refused to prosecute. 

It isn't her decision to prosecute or not, that's down to the CPS, if they believe there is a strong case of a conviction & its in the public interest. She can refuse to give evidence for what ever reason but potentially in not doing so could be charged with perverting the course of justice. She wasn't. 

CPS can still bring a case without her giving agreeing to give evidence - they didnt.

So as ive stated previously there was little chance of a conviction despite all the (so called) factual evidence that has appeared in the media and been repeated here. 

As he has no conviction he is an innocent man. Legally & factually.   

[Deptford Yellow 260]

Perhaps he’d like to play in Saudi Arabia ?

[Greavsy 2,464]

25 minutes ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

As he’s still classed as innocent

Its not a case of being classed as Innocent - he is innocent, legally. there was no case brought. 

Technicality I know - apologies. 

[Canary Wundaboy 1,360]

In the eyes of the legal system he may be innocent, but there’s not a cat in hell’s chance that I’d set foot in Carrow Road or give the club a penny of my cash if such an individual was permitted to ply his trade at our club.

Listening to the recording was enough for me thanks.

[Greavsy 2,464]

8 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

Listening to the recording was enough for me thanks.

So you know 100% that the recording is genuine? is Greenwood and his partner on it? Isn't from some sort of role play? etc

That's the point.   

[Canary Wundaboy 1,360]

19 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

So you know 100% that the recording is genuine? is Greenwood and his partner on it? Isn't from some sort of role play? etc

That's the point.   

Do you not think that if it weren’t genuine, Greenwood and his lawyers would have immediately claimed it was a fake/not him and threatened to sue whoever was presenting it as such? Comon’ Greavsy I gave you more credit than that.

[Greavsy 2,464]

1 minute ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

Do you not think that if it weren’t genuine, Greenwood and his lawyers would have immediately claimed it was a fake/not him and threatened to sue whoever was presenting it as such? Comon’ Greavsy I gave you more credit than that.

Its a fair point. 

Maybe Greenwood put it out there? we have no idea, and it would be a stupid thing to do, but we dont know any of the facts, thats the point im making. 

What im saying is whats presented in the media, generally, isn't always factual. 

Maybe they tried, we dont know. same reasons apply as why the person wasn't prepared to give evidence. 

[Worthy Nigelton 1,080]

I'm a believer in second chances in most cases in life and you can't write a man off for the rest of their lives/career for something (admittedly horrendous) that he did at 19 years old. Having said that, would I want him dating my daughter? Absolutely not.

It's a really tricky situation with no right or wrong answer.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

We wouldn't need that unwanted publicity. Only he knows what went on. Leave it at that.