Mason Greenwood

[Ziderarmy]

19 hours ago, Fordy62 said:

Right… so it’s fair to say that after the social media allegations GMP had reasonable grounds to suspect he’d committed the offences of rape and assault. He was therefore arrested. 

I would assume that the further arrested means that post his arrest GMP discovered evidence of further offences they now had cause to suspect him of committing. My assumption would be that these would have come through obtaining a statement from the complainant which they probably didn’t have prior to his arrest. 

It doesn’t mean a great deal to be honest, other than that there are other offences that they’re now looking at. It doesn’t give them any more time, but as someone suggested, the range of offences has now increased. 

Being a betting man, I’d suggest a charge is round the corner and he’ll be held by police until court the day after he’s charged. My bet would then be that some highly paid barrister will manage to get him bail further on down the line. 

Edit: I’d definitely have a cheeky ton on him being charged tomorrow. Looks like GMP are really going to town on him - you rarely see Mags Court extensions for anything other than murder. I think he’d have been released by now if they weren’t going to charge him - but I suppose I am wrong on occasions!

You got most of that wrong again then…

You’re also a imaginary £100 down…

Edited February 2, 2022 by ziderheadarmy

[Fordy62]

28 minutes ago, ziderheadarmy said:

You got most of that wrong again then…

You’re also a imaginary £100 down…

I was indeed wrong! Goodness me! Thankfully it was an imaginary £100. 

[Maltshoveller]

4 minutes ago, billywedlock said:

GoodWillie , Mendy and Greenwood sharing the  headlines on the same day . Football really has got to get its act together . It has pushed heavily kicking racism out of sport , justifiably. Could we now see a much stronger concerted effort at kicking rapists and violence against women out of football and a greater support for keeping women safe . It just seems to me these issues get brushed under the proverbial carpet after the initial outrage with no ongoing efforts or attempts to raise the profile/impact of these incidents made . 
 

In an age when everyone seems to be outraged at verbal abuse and opinion, how can such physical abuse against women not carry a stronger , more visible and ultimately consistent wrath . Leading to change . 

Huge complex subject . But something has to change and football needs to do more . 
 

 

Sorry but this is a society in general problem 

As long as nothing changes there nothing will change much in football 

[Red-Robbo]

1 hour ago, billywedlock said:

GoodWillie , Mendy and Greenwood sharing the  headlines on the same day . Football really has got to get its act together . It has pushed heavily kicking racism out of sport , justifiably. Could we now see a much stronger concerted effort at kicking rapists and violence against women out of football and a greater support for keeping women safe . It just seems to me these issues get brushed under the proverbial carpet after the initial outrage with no ongoing efforts or attempts to raise the profile/impact of these incidents made . 
 

In an age when everyone seems to be outraged at verbal abuse and opinion, how can such physical abuse against women not carry a stronger , more visible and ultimately consistent wrath . Leading to change . 

Huge complex subject . But something has to change and football needs to do more . 
 

 

 

Totally agree. They are all different cases though.

Goodwillie has been found guilty of rape by a court (yes, I know it was a civil case, but it heard the evidence and convicted). I think the SFA and FA should jointly make it a rule that anyone convicted of rape and a number of other serious offences cannot play professional football. We know players are looked up to by young boys. We cannot normalise sexual violence by letting such a man participate in such a public sport.

Mendy is accused of horrific crimes and is awaiting trial. He's suspended. If convicted - and the little I've seen looks damning for him - I can't imagine him ever earning a living in the sport again. Even if a non-European club might be tempted to hire a serial rapist, he'll serve too long to be in contention on release.

Greenwood - I imagine the senior officers in the case are talking with the CPS about the likelihood of making charges stick. But even without charges, that audio would make me want to instantly release him from his contract if I was Man U.  Unless he has very good proof that wasn't him, or was in some way faked, he should be history, even if he isn't charged and convicted.

Which all bring us on to what audio and body cam footage will show us about the behaviour of a Mr Joseph Barton, when his case resumes in March. Being forgiven and excused by the victim doesn't mean you aren't violent towards women. Unacceptable. Danny Simpson, that goes for you too. You're in a well-paid job where higher standards of behaviour should be demanded than trying to choke your missus because you were in a temper. I didn't want him here. I still don't. His presence taints our club. 

Edited February 2, 2022 by Red-Robbo

[The Batman]

3 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Mendy is accused of horrific crimes and is in custody awaiting trial. As such he's de facto suspended. If convicted - and the little I've seen looks damning for him - I can't imagine him ever earning a living in the sport again. Even if a non-European club might be tempted to hire a serial rapist, he'll serve too long to be in contention on release.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-60216445.amp

Mendy was released on bail recently but today, has another rape charge against him. 

We also have the Everton player who we cannot name but that is still ongoing, and that involves a child. 

[Hxj]

6 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

Goodwillie has been found guilty of rape by a court (yes, I know it was a civil case, but it heard the evidence and convicted). I think the SFA and FA should jointly make it a rule that anyone convicted of rape and a number of other serious offences cannot play professional football.

He wasn't found guilty or convicted so this is wandering into dangerous grounds.

Edited February 2, 2022 by Hxj

[Red-Robbo]

3 minutes ago, Hxj said:

He wasn't found guilty or convicted so this is wandering into dangerous grounds.

 

He was convicted on the balance of probabilities in a civil court after a trial that heard the evidence and heard his defence. Nothing I wrote is dangerous.

6 minutes ago, The Batman said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-60216445.amp

Mendy was released on bail recently but today, has another rape charge against him. 

We also have the Everton player who we cannot name but that is still ongoing, and that involves a child. 

 

Good points. 

[Hxj]

3 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

He was convicted on the balance of probabilities in a civil court

He was found liable to pay damages in a civil court, saying that is correct,  That is not a conviction.  That is why it is wandering into dangerous grounds.  

[Red-Robbo]

Just now, Hxj said:

He was found liable to pay damages in a civil court, saying that is correct,  That is not a conviction.  That is why it is wandering into dangerous grounds.  

It isn't a criminal conviction and I never said it was.  OJ Simpson was not criminally convicted of murder, but he was likewise found legally liable (in his case for two murders).  Were he still an active sportsman, I'd argue that he should be debarred from appearing on that basis.  

[myol'man]

Interesting article from Ian Landyman in the Mail

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-10461457/IAN-LADYMAN-Fixers-clubs-turning-blind-eye-fuel-stars-sense-entitlement-women.html

 

 

[Numero Uno]

1 hour ago, The Batman said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-60216445.amp

Mendy was released on bail recently but today, has another rape charge against him. 

We also have the Everton player who we cannot name but that is still ongoing, and that involves a child. 

We can say it isn't Fabian Delph though. That will do!!

[The Constant Rabbit]

6 hours ago, myol'man said:

Interesting article from Ian Landyman in the Mail

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-10461457/IAN-LADYMAN-Fixers-clubs-turning-blind-eye-fuel-stars-sense-entitlement-women.html

 

 

Indeed, and as widely suspected by the realists on here:

"Do the clubs know? Very often, yes. Pre-season and indeed post-season tours are particularly fertile breeding grounds for these hook-ups. Sometimes, with two big clubs in the same part of the world at the same time, they can involve players from more than one team.

In terms of coaches, managers and staff, they have been known simply to look the other way."

[Ron W]

On 01/02/2022 at 22:02, The Batman said:

Nome of the media (bbc, sky, bt sport etc) have never asked Everton why their record £45 million signing and highest earner hasn't played all season (don't )

If you're hoping for some sort of weird scandal on this I'm afraid you'll be sadly disappointed.

I don't know what the exact reasons are why there's been no major news coverage of that specific topic, but look at Google. All of the results are from overseas. That suggests there are some kind of reporting restrictions in place, which is far from unusual.

Edited February 3, 2022 by RonWalker

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

20 hours ago, billywedlock said:

GoodWillie , Mendy and Greenwood sharing the  headlines on the same day . Football really has got to get its act together . It has pushed heavily kicking racism out of sport , justifiably. Could we now see a much stronger concerted effort at kicking rapists and violence against women out of football and a greater support for keeping women safe . It just seems to me these issues get brushed under the proverbial carpet after the initial outrage with no ongoing efforts or attempts to raise the profile/impact of these incidents made . 
 

In an age when everyone seems to be outraged at verbal abuse and opinion, how can such physical abuse against women not carry a stronger , more visible and ultimately consistent wrath . Leading to change . 

Huge complex subject . But something has to change and football needs to do more . 
 

I disagree, I think the high profile nature of football means it gets more attention when things like this happen, I don't think it has a problem anymore than any other workplace, just the men concerned are celebrities.  I cant remember the study but something like 6% of men showed a predilection to rape, that's a lot of men.   It's a societal issue, I think the celebrity of these individuals help shine a light on it, but lets not kid ourselves "Football" has a problem.  

[Phileas Fogg]

7 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

I disagree, I think the high profile nature of football means it gets more attention when things like this happen, I don't think it has a problem anymore than any other workplace, just the men concerned are celebrities.  I cant remember the study but something like 6% of men showed a predilection to rape, that's a lot of men.   It's a societal issue, I think the celebrity of these individuals help shine a light on it, but lets not kid ourselves "Football" has a problem.  

Hmm.. No data to back it up, but I think earning millions a year, getting constant special treatment and being adored by thousands of fans probably isn’t necessarily that healthy for young men in the scheme of things. 

If I had to put money on it, I’d wager the average % of issues like this is far higher in footballers than other professions for men of similar ages. 

[Northern Red]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-60244442

David Goodwillie will not play for Raith Rovers and the club is reviewing his contract after admitting it "got it wrong" by signing him.

[The Batman]

34 minutes ago, RonWalker said:

If you're hoping for some sort of weird scandal on this I'm afraid you'll be sadly disappointed.

I don't know what the exact reasons are why there's been no major news coverage of that specific topic, but look at Google. All of the results are from overseas. That suggests there are some kind of reporting restrictions in place, which is far from unusual.

Reporting restrictions you say? Well sherlock holmes' and Colombo's jobs are under threat with you around. Blige. (I jest obviously) 

As the Everton player's name has never been released by the club or the authorities, what is wrong in asking why Everton's record signing and highest earner hasn't played all season? It's not like they're doing well without him. What rules would they be breaking? They're not reporting on a crime, they're asking a football related question......

[Super]

1 minute ago, The Batman said:

Reporting restrictions you say? Well sherlock holmes' and Colombo's jobs are under threat with you around. Blige. (I jest obviously) 

As the Everton player's name has never been released by the club or the authorities, what is wrong in asking why Everton's record signing and highest earner hasn't played all season? It's not like they're doing well without him. What rules would they be breaking? They're not reporting on a crime, they're asking a football related question......

Is he still on fifa though.

[The Batman]

1 minute ago, Super said:

Is he still on fifa though.

Course he would be. His name hasn't been released 

However, he is no longer listed as a player on the official Premier league fantasy football. He was for a while but isn't as of now. 

[Red-Robbo]

21 minutes ago, The Batman said:

Reporting restrictions you say? Well sherlock holmes' and Colombo's jobs are under threat with you around. Blige. (I jest obviously) 

As the Everton player's name has never been released by the club or the authorities, what is wrong in asking why Everton's record signing and highest earner hasn't played all season? It's not like they're doing well without him. What rules would they be breaking? They're not reporting on a crime, they're asking a football related question......

 

Delph played a couple of games in November and was an unused sub in another.

A different player was named as the man arrested in the Icelandic press. 

[Numero Uno]

38 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Delph played a couple of games in November and was an unused sub in another.

A different player was named as the man arrested in the Icelandic press. 

Yeah, you have to ask yourself why the Icelandic press should be so interested…………..in Fabian Delph obviously!!

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

1 hour ago, billywedlock said:

Just like football has the same issues of racism as the rest of society . But in this case football chooses to do something about it . 
 

Football is a source of role models . You are saying it’s just business as normal then . Football carries a greater responsibility as it has visibility. Football has a problem because it chooses to tackle some subjects such as racism with justified vigour but plays lip service to violence against women .

I totally disagree with you brushing it under the carpet . It is exactly what is wrong and why more needs to be done . 

I didn't say brush it under the carpet, I disagree with making it all about football when there are plenty of bed eggs in society.   Football can still set an example, but using language like they are molly coddled, rich young men, forgets that some of these young men come from abusive homes, and then happen to be rich, its a much more complex conversation than that,  football makes a nice little societal scapegoat, but in reality its just a more visible part of society. 

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

Just a couple of (no doubt unpopular) points:

it beats me how anyone can get a fair trial in this country when a case is fully worked out in public prior to any charges even being brought.  Whatever happened to the concept of matters being sub judice?  Nixon declared that Charles Manson was guilty before the verdicts in his court case, and it very nearly caused the whole case to collapse.  Where are they going to find twelve jurors who can swear not to have been influenced by what they have read prior to any trial in the Greenwood case?

And whatever happened to the notion of paying your dues and being rehabilitated?  The concept seems meaningless in todays culture, yet people still reminisce fondly about the iconic part of Dirty Den on EastEnders, as portrayed by Leslie Grantham, a convicted murderer.  I don’t remember many references to the actor as ‘the murderer Leslie Grantham’ in discussion of this, and other roles, on popular tv.

The fact is that innocent people have been accused of crimes they did not commit; and guilty people have gone on to play a valuable role in society.  That’s why we have a justice system.

[Numero Uno]

3 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Just a couple of (no doubt unpopular) points:

it beats me how anyone can get a fair trial in this country when a case is fully worked out in public prior to any charges even being brought.  Whatever happened to the concept of matters being sub judice?  Nixon declared that Charles Manson was guilty before the verdicts in his court case, and it very nearly caused the whole case to collapse.  Where are they going to find twelve jurors who can swear not to have been influenced by what they have read prior to any trial in the Greenwood case?

And whatever happened to the notion of paying your dues and being rehabilitated?  The concept seems meaningless in todays culture, yet people still reminisce fondly about the iconic part of Dirty Den on EastEnders, as portrayed by Leslie Grantham, a convicted murderer.  I don’t remember many references to the actor as ‘the murderer Leslie Grantham’ in discussion of this, and other roles, on popular tv.

The fact is that innocent people have been accused of crimes they did not commit; and guilty people have gone on to play a valuable role in society.  That’s why we have a justice system.

Take your points on board but I could literally walk out of my house this afternoon and find you 12 people who don’t have a clue who Mason Greenwood is, no problem at all.

[Red-Robbo]

43 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Take your points on board but I could literally walk out of my house this afternoon and find you 12 people who don’t have a clue who Mason Greenwood is, no problem at all.

 

Cheers for saving me the bother of writing this.  I'm sitting opposite one such at this very minute. 

[LondonBristolian]

51 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Just a couple of (no doubt unpopular) points:

it beats me how anyone can get a fair trial in this country when a case is fully worked out in public prior to any charges even being brought.  Whatever happened to the concept of matters being sub judice?  Nixon declared that Charles Manson was guilty before the verdicts in his court case, and it very nearly caused the whole case to collapse.  Where are they going to find twelve jurors who can swear not to have been influenced by what they have read prior to any trial in the Greenwood case?

And whatever happened to the notion of paying your dues and being rehabilitated?  The concept seems meaningless in todays culture, yet people still reminisce fondly about the iconic part of Dirty Den on EastEnders, as portrayed by Leslie Grantham, a convicted murderer.  I don’t remember many references to the actor as ‘the murderer Leslie Grantham’ in discussion of this, and other roles, on popular tv.

The fact is that innocent people have been accused of crimes they did not commit; and guilty people have gone on to play a valuable role in society.  That’s why we have a justice system.

The issue for me is that paying your dues and being rehabilitated should be the result of someone atoning, taking responsibility and putting the work in to put right the wrongs they have committed. Yes, everyone deserves a second chance but that doesn't mean the second chance is something is granted automatically. It means that people who atone, apologise and learn from mistakes get the chance to do better next time. 

With certain players - let's take the David Goodwillie case for example- you've got someone who has never pleaded guilty, never publicly taken personal responsibility and never acknowledged to their victim the impact that they had on them. How have they paid their dues? Where is the rehabilitation in that? 

A second chance has to start from an admission of guilt and steps to put things right. If someone is still saying "poor me" and pleading innocence, rehabilitation is impossible. 

[PHILINFRANCE]

8 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

The issue for me is that paying your dues and being rehabilitated should be the result of someone atoning, taking responsibility and putting the work in to put right the wrongs they have committed. Yes, everyone deserves a second chance but that doesn't mean the second chance is something is granted automatically. It means that people who atone, apologise and learn from mistakes get the chance to do better next time. 

With certain players - let's take the David Goodwillie case for example- you've got someone who has never pleaded guilty, never publicly taken personal responsibility and never acknowledged to their victim the impact that they had on them. How have they paid their dues? Where is the rehabilitation in that? 

A second chance has to start from an admission of guilt and steps to put things right. If someone is still saying "poor me" and pleading innocence, rehabilitation is impossible. 

Indeed.

Perhaps the phrase might be written better as:

Everyone deserves the right to acknowledge and apologise for their mistake and work to try and earn a second chance.

[Ron W]

3 hours ago, The Batman said:

As the Everton player's name has never been released by the club or the authorities, what is wrong in asking why Everton's record signing and highest earner hasn't played all season? It's not like they're doing well without him. What rules would they be breaking? They're not reporting on a crime, they're asking a football related question......

Even if they're not breaking rules, what is the actual point apart from being antagonistic? At best, it could be a good way of getting yourself banned from press conferences or needlessly souring relations with a club over a question you know they con't answer. At worst, it could be contempt of court.

Edited February 3, 2022 by RonWalker

[Leveller]

1 hour ago, LondonBristolian said:

The issue for me is that paying your dues and being rehabilitated should be the result of someone atoning, taking responsibility and putting the work in to put right the wrongs they have committed. Yes, everyone deserves a second chance but that doesn't mean the second chance is something is granted automatically. It means that people who atone, apologise and learn from mistakes get the chance to do better next time. 

With certain players - let's take the David Goodwillie case for example- you've got someone who has never pleaded guilty, never publicly taken personal responsibility and never acknowledged to their victim the impact that they had on them. How have they paid their dues? Where is the rehabilitation in that? 

A second chance has to start from an admission of guilt and steps to put things right. If someone is still saying "poor me" and pleading innocence, rehabilitation is impossible. 

Unless of course they say “poor me”, continue to plead innocence then get found not guilty on appeal!

[LondonBristolian]

10 minutes ago, Leveller said:

Unless of course they say “poor me”, continue to plead innocence then get found not guilty on appeal!

Of course. But - until that happens - the legal fact is that they are guilty of a crime and that guilt has been established after a detailed trial. Wrong convictions happen but the system is designed to ensure that someone cannot be convicted unless an offence is proven beyond reasonable doubt. The number of guilty people who escape justice due to lack of evidence outweighs the number of innocent people wrongly convicted, and that is the only way it can be for the system to be fair.

At the same time, it's worth considering that you don't have to committed a crime in the eyes of the law to have done a great deal of harm to another person and have things to atone for.