• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Greenwood's future

Mackem00 said:
Desperate to not defend the mags with allsorts of shite whataboutery? You've got me bang to rights there mind. 👍
Click to expand...
No, desperately trying to find something to get upset about & hopelessly failing to accept if the invest came our way our fans would act any differently.

Would you be prepared to set up & follow a new football club like the Man U fans did when the Glazer's took over?
 

Fats said:
No, desperately trying to find something to get upset about & hopelessly failing to accept if the invest came our way our fans would act any differently.

Would you be prepared to set up & follow a new football club like the Man U fans did when the Glazer's took over?
Click to expand...
To be fair, he's right about the whataboutery.....
 
Fats said:
No, desperately trying to find something to get upset about & hopelessly failing to accept if the invest came our way our fans would act any differently.

Would you be prepared to set up & follow a new football club like the Man U fans did when the Glazer's took over?
Click to expand...
Upset? :lol:

No point in making things up just because I disagree with your defending of the mags mate. I'd be against my club being bought by a nation state with known direct links to terrorism for what it's worth. Hardlys a controversial opinion mind.

What have the Glazer's got to do with this? Is that another piece of daft whataboutery?
 
Last edited:
UaeExile said:
To be fair, he's right about the whataboutery.....
Click to expand...
No he isn't.

My point isn't about the Mags being taken over, it's about double standards & if Sunderland were taken over an oil rich state with abhorrent human rights records, the majority of our fans would happily go along with it.
 
Fats said:
Double standards simple as.

If the Saudi's had chosen to invest in Sunderland, do you seriously think the vast majority of our fans would not have celebrated the same way Mags have
Click to expand...
Fats said:
No, desperately trying to find something to get upset about & hopelessly failing to accept if the invest came our way our fans would act any differently.

Would you be prepared to set up & follow a new football club like the Man U fans did when the Glazer's took over?
Click to expand...
If Saudis had invested in SAFC I’d still be gan every game .
Not gonna kid myself and say otherwise
 
Mackem00 said:
Upset? :lol:

No point in making things up just because I disagree with your defending of the mags mate. I'd be against my club being bought by a nation state with known direct links to terrorism for what it's worth. Hardlys a controversial opinion mind.

What have the Glazer's got to do with this? Is that another piece of daft whataboutery?
Click to expand...
Very upset and all this is doing is showing your inability to accept the fact that Sunderland fans, and fans of any other club for that matter, would happily accept oil money.

And, if you can point out anywhere I've defended the Mags then I'll retract the statement in in instant. Having countries invest in football clubs is bad enough. Having an evil regime that couldn't care less about basic human rights is merely rubbing salt in to an open wound.
Chi boy said:
If Saudis had invested in SAFC I’d still be gan every game .
Not gonna kid myself and say otherwise
Click to expand...
Thank you for your honesty
 
Fats said:
Very upset and all this is doing is showing your inability to accept the fact that Sunderland fans, and fans of any other club for that matter, would happily accept oil money.

And, if you can point out anywhere I've defended the Mags then I'll retract the statement in in instant. Having countries invest in football clubs is bad enough. Having an evil regime that couldn't care less about basic human rights is merely rubbing salt in to an open wound.

Thank you for your honesty
Click to expand...
Saying I'm very upset isn't gonna stop you looking like a mag sympathiser mate. No matter how many times you say it. I could make up things about your mood but it seems a bit pointless really.
 
Fats said:
Very upset and all this is doing is showing your inability to accept the fact that Sunderland fans, and fans of any other club for that matter, would happily accept oil money.

And, if you can point out anywhere I've defended the Mags then I'll retract the statement in in instant. Having countries invest in football clubs is bad enough. Having an evil regime that couldn't care less about basic human rights is merely rubbing salt in to an open wound.

Thank you for your honesty
Click to expand...

He’s one of yours man :lol:
 
Mackem Al said:
The added context at the bottom where it states he wasn't cleared of charges, but charges were dropped is the key part there. A very distinct difference.
Click to expand...
Charges were dropped because the CPS KNEW he'd be found not guilty. If he had been found not guilty (which he would have done), then everyone would agree that he was cleared. Its tantamount to the same thing.


Remember, "corrections" on tweets are just people's opinions, and in matters like this it can be difficult to specify the actual facts.
Mickdundee said:
She was recording an audition tape for Hollyoaks, and one of her friends is training to be a special effects makeup artist and she let them practice on her.
Click to expand...
I didn't want to speculate, but that's not a crazy suggestion.
Another is that they were into - lets just say "role play" because I don't want to offend anyone on this sensitive subject.
Wild Card said:
But football lost its morale compass a long time ago.
He will probably send up somewhere decent. Mags will probably take him.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's true. On this topic, convictions tend to lead to the end of a career entirely.
And I think Greenwood is going to massively struggle to find a club, as there will be a backlash anywhere he goes in the UK due to the trial by social media that has already concluded that he's guilty
Fats said:
Can you hand on heart, really say, if the Saudi's had chosen to invest in Sunderland you would have walked away?
Click to expand...
Tough question. I'm glad that choice wasn't required.
 
Last edited:
Fats said:
No he isn't.

My point isn't about the Mags being taken over, it's about double standards & if Sunderland were taken over an oil rich state with abhorrent human rights records, the majority of our fans would happily go along with it.
Click to expand...

So if's and woulds.....

Well done for making the most pointless posts the forum is likely to see today.
 
Occam's Razor said:
It's astounding how many people fail to understand simple concepts about how the law works in this country. Without the victim in a case such as this being willing to testify, there's simply no realistic chance of a conviction, so the police and CPS won't pursue. This is a million miles away from Greenwood's weaselly "cleared of all charges" in his statement, which has been disappointingly quoted without challenge by a lot of media sources and found its way into the general discussion as if it's a thing.

It's as if you see your neighbour regularly bray his missus all over, report it but she refuses to testify or make a statement. What do you do? Presume he must be innocent because he's not been convicted even though you witnessed it? We've all heard the audio, we've all seen her injuries, we all know what Mason Greenwood is.

"innocent until proven guilty" is a specific legal term applying to how the state treats alleged criminals, not a fact. As soon as you commit a crime you're guilty of it, it's up to the state to be able to prove it to make you guilty in a strictly legal sense which is extremely difficult to do in cases of domestic abuse.
Click to expand...

If I see my neighbour giving his misses a kicking, I SAW IT and I know what happened. None of us have any real idea what's gone on in this case.
Only the people involved know what happened. The CPS knew he'd be found not guilty in court, so he's effectively been cleared by the legal system.

Given that we don't know what really happened, how can any of us make any judgements on him?

Its entirely unlike the Saville example that came along later where countless people came forward once they realised they were not alone and their personal evidence was overwhelming.

As for your last post, its not just some footnote in legal-speak:
"The concept of “innocent until proven guilty” is a fundamental principle of the justice system in many countries around the world. The principle is that an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It is also known as “The presumption of innocence”"
 
Occam's Razor said:
Sigh.
Click to expand...
No worries mate. You're one of the few posters I notice I enjoy reading on here. Just a slight difference of opinion on a technical level.
I'm staying out entirely of getting into the specifics of the case because its 3 years down the line, and I'm jumping on at the last moment. I get that.
 
PTR said:
If I see my neighbour giving his misses a kicking, I SAW IT and I know what happened. None of us have any real idea what's gone on in this case.
Only the people involved know what happened. The CPS knew he'd be found not guilty in court, so he's effectively been cleared by the legal system.

Given that we don't know what really happened, how can any of us make any judgements on him?

Its entirely unlike the Saville example that came along later where countless people came forward once they realised they were not alone and their personal evidence was overwhelming.

As for your last post, its not just some footnote in legal-speak:
"The concept of “innocent until proven guilty” is a fundamental principle of the justice system in many countries around the world. The principle is that an individual is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. It is also known as “The presumption of innocence”"
Click to expand...

Bang on, but now prepare to get pelters from the mob :)
 
Betty Swollocks said:
Surprise surprise, Greenwood could be offered a £10m per year deal by Steven Gerard’s Saudi club Al-etiffaq. According to the Sun by the way….
Click to expand...
He has to go abroad I think. The "acquitted" message will carry weight outside of the UK, whereas in the UK I think the campaigns will make it impossible to hire him.
 
Betty Swollocks said:
Surprise surprise, Greenwood could be offered a £10m per year deal by Steven Gerard’s Saudi club Al-etiffaq. According to the Sun by the way….
Click to expand...
Mourinho also wants him at Roma according to rumours.
Wonder if United are just going to terminate his contract or let him go on a free with (probably) a huge sell-on clause?
Money talks with the Glazers so I reckon there will be a big sell-on clause.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top