Mason Greenwood

[LinekersLegs]

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Incredible Man Utd never just immediately binned him off.

Dont buy this 'employee/employer' relationship BS either.

 

[roydo]

Incredible Man Utd never just immediately binned him off.

Dont buy this 'employee/employer' relationship BS either.

Legals, lawyers, stuff.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Legals, lawyers, stuff.

Aye, they're big enough if it comes to that to just pay it.

Reckon they'd paid more in fees (pr/legal etc) to manage the issue for so long than any potential employer tribunal anyway.

If he was a no mark player - or say, 35 they'd have binned him immediately.

 

[f.t.r.s]

It's not justice but its the closest we'll get

 

[roydo]

Aye, they're big enough if it comes to that to just pay it.

Reckon they'd paid more in fees (pr/legal etc) to manage the issue for so long than any potential employer tribunal anyway.

If he was a no mark player - or say, 35 they'd have binned him immediately.

Oh deffo. No doubt. But there is sommet "not in the public eye" that no one has a clue about. I have a theory, but that is all it is.

The "stuff" was more about the club being sold. Or not.

 

[f.t.r.s]

Having a child together apparently.

Wouldn't surprise me of that played a major part in it....financially securing the child's future

 

[barneygumble]

And there is it.

Not been released, United will get a nice £50m when he goes off to Saudi and he leaves the spotlight.

United probably get a nice tidy buy back clause and there’s no issue.

Two massive events United have handled terribly in the past couple of years now, alongside the Super League. The tweet above shared by Linekers Legs sums them up, not guilty they wanted to keep him, only guilty when the heat started to rise.

An utter embarrassment. Modern football. What a farce.

 

[tsubaki]

Oh deffo. No doubt. But there is sommet "not in the public eye" that no one has a clue about. I have a theory, but that is all it is.

The "stuff" was more about the club being sold. Or not.

If the theory is that she told the club first and they did nothing, I agree with you.

 

[Yarrgh]

She probably will, its standard cycle, hit her, she leaves for a while, he comes back promising he gonna change, few months of peace and then rinse and repeat.

Especially dangerous if victim doesn't have someone who gonna support/help her like a decent parents or siblings.

From what I have heard the parents were/ are at the wits end when she went back to him.

 

[roydo]

If the theory is that she told the club first and they did nothing, I agree with you.

Its not that, but its unimportant really.

 

[tsubaki]

From what I have heard the parents were/ are at the wits end when she went back to him.

Not sure about that, when it happened they seemed torn up because they thought the two of them loved each other.

 

[DavidH]

Some club that. They've had George Best known session head and gooser, Cantona going Bruce Lee on a fan, Luke Chadwick terrifying peoples children, Paul Scholes noshing his daughters toes, David Beckham wearing a skirt, Rooney walloping granny brass and anything else he can get his hands on, Ryan Giggs being an abuser and chronic gooser including his own brothers wife, Patrice Evra licking raw chicken now this little thug.

 

[Goat]

Christ.

 

[LinekersLegs]

Aye, they're big enough if it comes to that to just pay it.

Reckon they'd paid more in fees (pr/legal etc) to manage the issue for so long than any potential employer tribunal anyway.

If he was a no mark player - or say, 35 they'd have binned him immediately.

I'm not naive enough to think a little thing like morality would have come into the decision process but as you've said between the lawyer fees, pr fees and the hit they have taken to their brand (sponsors really love to be asked about domestic violence) you'd have thought it a simple business decision.