Mason Greenwood

Agree with what you have put there BUT John Terry was found no case to answer but found guilty by the FA.

 

Am saddened by the departure of several high profile players to Saudi Arabia, but would have welcomed seeing Greenwood go there. He'd fit into the culture. Also the outside chance of him being beheaded for a lesser crime, like a sneaky outdoor beer.

 

I find the whole thing uncomfortable & ultimately incredibly sad. I don't know what to think is the right thing to do.

He's not been found guilty of anything which makes it morally a challenge for me to say he can't continue with his life & to make a living doing what just happens to be being a brilliant footballer.

He's a product of a society that has objectified women and exposed young men at a critical stage to basically unlimited porn & a 'lad' culture that has confused what is acceptable and not when it comes to sex & general relationships.

He's obviously a bit of an arsehole, probably added to by the fact he's so good at football & been lauded all his life, but he's not been found guilty of a crime.

If the moral compass is arseholes shouldn't be allowed to play football, what about arseholes on building sites? Call centres? Pubs?

It's really bloody difficult & I don't know the answer.

 

I think he should be allowed to play football, but that clubs should recognise their community values and morals and choose not to employ him.

Welcoming him back as if nothing happened just further perpetuates the culture you mention in your third paragraph.

 

Decent thoughts, but I believe it's only the quirk of the law that the complainant withdrew the complaint that stopped him being found guilty. CPS didn't have a leg to stand on. He's guilty in most people's eyes due to what is in the public domain.

 

But you're basically then blacklisting him aren't you? Making someone unemployable doesn't feel right to me.

 

Yep get that. But there are plenty of examples of ppl having done bad things and been found not guilty. That's the only black and white thing for me - he's not guilty of a crime.

 

There's no point engaging with someone who starts from a position of advocating violence, never mind it being upon an non-convicted man.

 

And while we're on that tack, what about a thread that objectifies and demeans women on here and has been allowed to run to 23 pages? Is that in any way acceptable? I think we can be better than that.

 

Fair enough, that was a comment made in the heat of the moment after reading about it. I accept it was wrong and recant it.

Would you be happy with him playing for Barnsley?

 

We must never depart from due process and the paramount importance of the rule of law. To do so - even in cases like this - is the beginning of the slope that justifies Johnson attempting to bypass Parliament and Trump traducing the democratic process and the authority of the American courts. Departing from due process and the rule of law is the short cut to tyranny.

 

Yep there's some absolute wrong uns on here.

 

I'm not making him unemployable, I'm just hoping clubs individually choose not to employ him. He's free to seek employment in football or any other industries.

There's a whole host of things that aren't illegal that would lead to no firm in my industry touching me with a bargepole, things a lot milder than what the recordings demonstrate.

Also he has as 100% breached his bail conditions which has interfered with an ongoing investigation against him. That's objectively true.

 

Yeah that's fair enough I suppose. I just ultimately feel quite sorry for everybody involved.

 

No

 

Rape is more than being an arse hole surely?

 

In Ireland there was a very public rape trial involving two high profile rugby players. The players were eventually found not guilty. Not innocent, just not enough evidence to be guilty. The clear takeaway from the trial was that even if the rape threshold wasn't crossed, which is debateable, the men in question clearly did not do right by the victim that evening and certainly did not treat her well.

The fallout has been that they have had to restart careers abroad and won't ever play for their country again.

This is a pretty similar case, the evidence against Greenwood is stronger and he clearly did not treat the victim as anyone should be treated. If this isn't a convictable offence then there will of course be a trial by public opinion due to the his high profile. Best thing is for him to bugger off elsewhere out of the limelight for a while.

 

He's not 'not guilty' either. For the same reason; it didn't get to court to be decided.

 

I'm a bit surprised I need to reply to this, but of course it is.

 

Get that too. Why the entire thing is so hard.