both giggs and mason greenwood have not been convicted of anything. shouldnt football clubs be allowed to employ them?........i would ask rachel riley where shes going with all of this........now anthony. untill hes convicted of something shouldnt he be allowed to continue to play football?..........mendy is another one. they are not school teachers or working in hospitals dealing with vulnerable people. this is all to do with corporations pretending they are brands. all this fake virtue signaling nonsense. then activists go after them directly or in UTD's case, their sponsors.

We’ve got to this stage from a disgusting history of men beating up women.

We live in an age of social media powered kangaroo courts where facts are ignored and men are always guilty.

The Spanish footballer who was kissed, she was smiling afterwards and joking about it later. But we are to ignore that video evidence because if does fit the narrative.

So when it's Greenwood, you think we should ignore the video and audio evidence and prioritise what she did later (refused to testify in court)


But in the other case, you want to go with the video evidence and ignore the later statements that it wasn't consensual.




Just loving the consistency.

PP when did I say the Greenwood video and audio evidence should be ignored? On the contrary I have always believed the case should have gone ahead with that evidence. I think the CPS need a good bollocking for dropping the case.


As for the Spanish kiss being consensual or not you are aware they'd just won the world cup and there was a lot of spontaneous kissing going on aren't you.

The Anthony case is more disturbing but again what is the truth?

WD - we've been through this all before, and god knows we don't need to do it again.

I've said before, MG should be free to resume his career. But equally clubs should be able to consider if they want him playing for them, and fans should be able to express their views on having him represent their clubs.


I just get amused/riled at the "it's men who are the real victims yanno!" bollocks.

PP

Right now I would take Greenwood at Arsenal although I would prefer the Milan striker!

Give Chelsea back Havertz , double the £65M and give it to Milan for Leao

Not remotely a straw man.

You believe MG is innocent as he hasn't faced trial. You've made that pretty plain. Just wondering if you only apply that logic due to the scarf around your neck or if you're consistent.

PP now you are again misrepresenting my opinion. Probably because your argument is weak.


You believe MG is innocent as he hasn't faced trial. That's untrue

I believe MG should have been tried. The fact he wasn't is just not right. Having been accused he should have been given the opportunity to defend himself in court.

If you read back to some of my postings on the Mendy trial you'll find I am all for the courts deciding guilt or innocence no matter what strip a player wears.

Indeed WD. Nobby a bit all over the place here.

eh?


I'm simply pointing out that your position is that people can't attack Greenwood (or Antony) until they've been found guilty in a court of law. Anyone pointing out the pics and audio are told they're in no position to judge and given some sexist treatment if they're female.


Now if that is your position, does it extend to non-Utd footballers such as Saville? Or do you save it for the lads on your pillowcase?

Go on then. the floor's yours. State your position on Greenwood and the likes of Riley criticising him.

Briefly as I am off out...

Having been charged MG should have been given the opportunity to defend himself in court with a neutral jury.

Rachel Riley has not seen all the evidence so is in no position to judge MG's guilt or innocence.

sometimes i get the impression left wing people barley want those guilty of sex and physical assault to go to jail. society is full of examples where offenders get light sentence after light sentence and repeat their acts. left wing people never get upset about it. particularly in relation to men who kick the crap out of men. just read your local newspaper of guys with so many convictions.

why then when it comes to footballers who have not been found guilty of anything do they get very upset?

what about the example of troy deeney who actually went to jail for assaulting someone. was there a campaign to end his career? no. and he actually got a job at talksport. i dont think ryan giggs will be getting a job in the media soon.

the gender of the victim has a lot to do with how this is all dealt with. the same people who are outraged about giggs dont get outraged about men who assault men. they are not exactly in favor of long sentences for offenders. but their the same people who talk about gender neutrality all the time.

i prefer to rely on the justice system to determine whether someone can do their job or not. i want long sentences for those found guilty of sex and physical assaults regardless of the gender of the persons involved. where their are allegations against people but no conviction, then it depends on what type of profession they are in. if giggs and greenwood were doctors or teachers then i dont think it would be wise for them to work with vulnerable people. but i do think they should be allowed to work in football again. maybe in giggs case not with women footballers.

can those on here who are outraged that greenwood can play again explain whether they are outraged by troy deeny playing again after he went to jail?

We live in a country where people are innocent until proven guilty.

The Social Media mob may not like it but it is the law of the land.

when Jimmy Savile was alive despite some accusations the CPS never prosecuted him. So as far as the world was concerned he was guilty of nothing.

If he was alive now, after the avalanche of accusations, it's most likely the CPS would be prosecuting him.


This situation highlights the necessity to report crimes. If no one reports offenders they are free to reoffend.

Rachel Riley has shared her experiences of being upskirted by a celebrity and his mates. She did not report the crime to the police and refuses to share the identity of the offender. This offender like Savile is free to reoffend.

Plenty reported Saville.

There are lots of other folk around that have
not been prosecuted after numerous accusations.

Many have lost faith in criminal law so go to social
media and sponsors.

Andrew not been tried but a pariah in uk.

So royals don't want him on their brand ticket.

Even the sleazy tories ( supported by Rachel) got
rid of Johnson in the end, did Johnson say owt
about him and his father?

If people want to coin it in, they need to avoid
scandal.

What’s the difference between the upskirter and MG?

Both accused but not convicted.

Is MG also an offender free to re-offend?