Football
Rachel Riley says she will stop supporting Man United if they bring back Greenwood
|
By:
|
|
By:
She's had the kid.
The simple fact is she appears to be in an abusive relationship even if she doesn't realise it herself. ManU need to move on, what if new stuff appears? |
|
By:
New stuff?
You mean like the accusations against Antony? |
|
By:
Like more recordings of his actions
|
|
By:
I'm just playing devil's advocate really. And being flippant with it.
|
|
By:
Yes & yes.
|
|
By:
To all those supporting greenwood, have all listened to the recording? Pretty damning imo, regardless of whether it went to court or not.
|
|
By:
What is it you want to happen to him?
Do you want him living on the brew and his bird going out selling her body for skag? |
|
By:
i saw rachel riley on countdown wearing a very short skirt
i be honest i got AROUSED first time i ever got a seven letter word |
|
By:
Ok, I'll say it, I thought in the audio she didn't sound frightened one little bit, perhaps I've missed something, I thought the audio was to be used for the defence
|
|
By:
Some people on here are so predictable they never need to write a word just the username would do.
|
|
By:
I heard the audio when it was originally news.
Thought it was a bit strange tbh Greenwood's tone would change from one sentence to the next, sometimes sounding very animated, then next line like he was trying to get to sleep and couldn't be bothered talking to the girl. I suspected it was recordings of different conversations that had been spliced together. So doubtful that what he is saying was in response to what you'd just heard her say. Anyway the police closed the investigation with the reason that 'significant new evience' had been found didn't they? What could that have been? Perhaps that the audio was indeed fabricated in some way. |
|
By:
If that was case they would be charging her, so unlikely.
|
|
By:
The genuineness of the audio has never been denied from what I understand.
Shrewd_dude, he's only got himself to blame. Plenty in life get by without being footballers. |
|
By:
What’s he to blame for? What do you think would be an appropriate job for that he should be allowed to do?
|
|
By:
Don't think it matters any more. Utd showed their hand in how they were desperate to reinstate him. U-turning now just makes them look weak, not moral.
Arnold will be gone by October. |
|
By:
Any job where he hasn't got the attention of 70,000 people having to watch him.
|
|
By:
^ to Shrewd
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
“If it’s 65,000 you can keep yer job laddie but when it gets to 70,000 yer a goner pal”.
Strange stance to have. |
|
By:
Ultimately it's up to the employer to decide if they want such a person representing them. It sends a message to their fans (and sponsors etc) about what they think about domestic violence. Especially when the player has been so silent about it and shown no contrition whatsoever. On the one hand you get a good player. But on the other you get all that bad press, plus imagine the furore if he gets caught doing it again (hardly a 100/1 shot).
Yes, we know the case didn't reach trial, but we've all seen the pics and know what was said. Let's not tie ourselves in knots in trying to pretend it didn't happen. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Exactly PoP.
Virtually everyone with a brain can see he's in an abusive relationship with this girl even though she may not see it herself. There are many women throughout the country in such relationships - many eventually end up dead. The reputational damage of any football club being associated with that isn't worth it. Saudi may be his best option. |
|
By:
“We’re a quiet Maccy D’s just now son and only get the the hundreds through the door so welcome to your new job as assistant food technician but if that new roundabout gets built and we start hitting thousands a day you’ll be out the door in a heartbeat”.
|
|
By:
Wow some people really do have the IQ od a grape
 |
|
By:
aye
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Obviously the complainer who doesn’t believe any crime was committed and the many legal experts at the CPS who decided there was no realistic prospect of a conviction should bow down to those who have the required intelligence to use the Google.
|
|
By:
Wesdag 19 Aug 23 18:17
Exactly PoP. Virtually everyone with a brain can see he's in an abusive relationship with this girl even though she may not see it herself. There are many women throughout the country in such relationships - many eventually end up dead. The reputational damage of any football club being associated with that isn't worth it. Saudi may be his best option. I'm sure I've read from you in the past that you want something tested in court before you would condemn someone. We are all against abuse but to talk about this audio as if you were listening to something out of a horror movie and condemn others for not reacting the same way is wrong. The tone of the tape is not shrouded with menace, the lady is freely contributing to the discourse, words alone without knowing the context of their bedroom habits generally tells us nothing. They are together with a child and the Police chucked it out. Just my opinion but the "tone" on here toward anyone who doesn't agree with the "obvious guilt" of Greenwood and the underlying suggestion that we are by definition abuse excusers is out of order. |
|
By:
The audio sounds pretty damning to me.
Utd don't give a sh1t about celebrity fans like Rachel Rider but if they bring him back and sponsors start to jump ship they're f#cked. |
|
By:
so many uninformed comments on this thread. it is amazing that people can have such strong views, one way or the other, when we arent familiar with all the evidence (and probably never will be).
here are two articles written by legal professionals i found interesting. https://www.bsbsolicitors.co.uk/blog/the-mason-greenwood-case-what-do-we-know/ https://barristerblogger.com/2023/02/06/the-court-of-public-opinion-will-need-no-rules-of-evidence-before-reaching-its-verdict-on-mason-greenwood/ |
|
By:
You are right duffy, I have in the past said allegations should be tested in court.
However, this appears to be a case of abusive & coercive control: victims often don't see themselves as victims. The fact that they now have a child is irrelevant. Many abused women stay with their partners - many end up dead eventually. Bottom line is, this is all about ManU & their reputation. What is the truth & what people believe to be the truth are not always the same. The audio & pictures don't strengthen whatever version of the truth MG would like us to believe. |
|
By:
“Appears to be” based on the information you have.
You surely must recognise that the people present and those who have reviewed all the evidence are in a much better position to form a conclusion than a person who watched some of the evidence on the internet? |
|
By:
Shrewd
Has MG or his reps come out & said the info was untrue? If it was all a hoax, do you not think that would've been shouted from the rooftops by now? A £100m asset stopped from playing because of a hoax?  |
|
By:
What are you then? Why do you need to know about "bedroom habits"? She said no, he didn't care. He explained it perfectly clearly in the recording. "They are together with a child" tells us that you don't know how these things work.
|
|
By:
What do you think a not guilty plea in a court before a judge means?
That they are saying the information is true? |
|
By:
 |
|
By:
Not sure what you’re laughing at Lifter.
The age old concept of saying something criminal is untrue by a not guilty plea in court is well established and has been used for hundreds of not thousands of years. Not sure people need to do a TikTok video or send their PR consultant out to add anything to it just because it’s 2023 |
|
By:
In court before a judge?
That didn't happen. The case was dropped due to “no longer a realistic prospect of conviction” after witnesses withdrew. |
