New claims emerge as Man Utd experience ‘backlash’ to statement on Mason Greenwood

New claims emerge as Man Utd experience social media ‘backlash’ to the statement they issued on the future of Mason Greenwood at the club.

Manchester United state that no decision has been made about Mason Greenwood, which is still the “subject of intensive internal deliberation” after charges against the 21 year old including attempted rape and assault, were dropped on the 2nd of February.

An announcement had been expected before Monday’s Premier League opener against Wolves but has since been delayed and now in a statement issued on Wednesday, United say that the “fact-finding phase” of their investigation was now complete, but the call now “ultimately rests” with chief executive officer Richard Arnold – and has reached the final stages.

It was reported that United’s could be letting Greenwood return in some form, however, due to the debate on what shoul dhappen next, they have put a pause on it.

Club statement.

— Manchester United (@ManUtd) August 16, 2023

CLUB STATEMENT:

Following the dropping of all charges against Mason Greenwood in February 2023, Manchester United has conducted a thorough investigation into the allegations made against him.

This has drawn on extensive evidence and context not in the public domain, and we have heard from numerous people with direct involvement or knowledge of the case.

Throughout this process, the welfare and perspective of the alleged victim has been central to the club’s inquiries, and we respect her right to lifelong anonymity.

We also have responsibilities to Mason as an employee, as a young person who has been with the club since the age of seven, and as a new father with a partner.

The fact-finding phase of our investigation is now complete, and we are in the final stages of making a decision on Mason’s future.

Contrary to media speculation, that decision has not yet been made and is currently the subject of intensive internal deliberation. Responsibility ultimately rests with the Chief Executive Officer.

Once made, the decision will be communicated and explained to the club’s internal and external stakeholders.

This has been a difficult case for everyone associated with Manchester United, and we understand the strong opinions it has provoked based on the partial evidence in the public domain. We ask for patience as we work through the final stages of this carefully considered process.

ADAM CRAFTON TWITTER THREAD

@AdamCrafton_: 🧵 Little thread on #mufc and Greenwood after today’s events, which may help people understand what happened. This is a bit industry-y but hopefully people appreciate the transparency.

This morning, I approached Manchester United with a series of facts relating to their internal “process” on Mason Greenwood, which included the detail (undisputed by the club) that chief exec Arnold had told his executive team that the club was planning to bring Greenwood back.

As journalists, we provide right of reply to anyone we approach with a time period (deadline) in which they can respond. This is in the interests of balance and accuracy. And we did that today.

The usual protocol is that a responder would respond to the journalist first and foremost so any background or comment can be inserted into the story, to ensure balance and accuracy.

On this occasion, we were asked to extend our deadline so club could gather its response. Then, simultaneously, around 1545, the club issued a statement on its website, an all-staff email, and a press statement to all journalists who cover the club. And sent to us at same time.

As such, the only reasonable conclusion is that today’s United statement was unplanned and cobbled together as the club deliberated how to respond to our story. (Nobody plans to deliver a public statement at 3.45pm on a Wednesday afternoon)

Clearly, quite annoying personally, because it felt like an attempt to deflect from/bury our reporting, where we acted in entirely good faith with the club. But way more importantly, it was illustrative of United attempting to seize back narrative on increasingly strained process.

Personal reading is United are unsettled & panicking that aspects of their choreographed plan made public and they are now witnessing a significant social backlash. I 100% stand by our reporting that Arnold told his exec team in 1st week August of plans to return Greenwood.

Of course, having abandoned their first proposed date (4th August), nothing has been announced, which gives the club plausible deniability on a “final decision”. After all, human beings can change their minds. (Likely reason for delay: wanting to brief women’s team still at WC)

But it is absolutely in the public interest for supporters of the club to know what has been going on in recent weeks, whatever happens next, and that’s why we reported this. https://t.co/FxA2iCZKzK

— Adam Crafton (@AdamCrafton_) August 16, 2023

SEE MORE: Man Utd fans plan to protest against Mason Greenwood’s reintegration into the first team

As mentioned, new claims emerge as Man Utd experience ‘backlash’ to statement on Mason Greenwood, this is what Twitter users are saying…

@giggschesthair: Completely agree as a ST holder. Few things to note. If not registered by September 1st he can’t play this side of Christmas anyway. Also having seen video of him training he wont be anywhere near match fitness to play for a long time…even with Utd’s performance on Monday

@oogieboogie77: There is no win for United or Greenwood playing in this country. He might get away with it somewhere but everyone’s seen what he did, I can’t imagine where he is going to be able to play without the fans of potentially both sides going at him.

@rycmrn: I think they’re grossly underestimating the backlash that Greenwood and Man United will receive off the back of this. I think he’ll get significantly more abuse than any PL player in recent history

@mb107614739: This will eventually be lose lose for Man United. They’ll bring him back, it will rightly cause absolute outrage and after a few weeks they will reverse their decision. But they’ll end up binning off Greenwood after the reputational damage to the club is already done.

@RedDevilWazza: His return would have to include a tv interview with him and his partner to show his things have changed. However it sounds like the club is bound to keep her anonymity, even though everyone knows her name, so I can’t see this happening. If it’s just him interviewed…🤷‍♂️

@gsanchez_writes: Exactly. This is an absolute lose-lose for everyone involved. There’s really no real reason why the club would want to reinstate him, unless they plan on selling him. And even then, their valuation of him is way too damned high. I see no other ending other than a buyout.

@RohitDoel: It cannot happen. It can’t. It gives a platform that anyone can hurt anyone. It’ll also fericosly damage them. If MUFC had any moral compass they wouldn’t allow it. Really grim reading.

@mattburn44: I’ll be surprised if sponsors don’t start looking to get out of their contract with man utd if they do bring him back. Who would want their company associated with a known rapist and a club that supports him? Do they not see the damage they are doing to their reputation?

@AllEnglandFlags: I think we can agree as a nation of loyal die hard football fans that the first person to end Mason Greenwood’s career will receive cult status and will never have to buy anything ever again.

@OfficialBigDave: This isn’t an update. You have procrastinated for 18 months in the hope that the furore might die down and you can bring him back in through the back door. It hasn’t worked out like that. Now you’re stumbling and trying to buy yourself some time while you work out what decision to take that makes for the best PR.

@FSDPod: This is basically a soft launch of bringing him back. We all know you’d have sacked him ages ago if you were going to at all. No shame at all and this has been handled as badly as anything in recent memory.