The Untold Story Behind Mason Greenwood's Departure from Manchester United

Mason Greenwood is set to pursue his career elsewhere, as informed by multiple sources to We News. It appears that the decision is primarily influenced by public criticism regarding the player's reintegration rather than the results of Manchester United's internal investigation. After an extensive six-month evaluation led by an executive panel, the club has finally disclosed their findings this week.

The club and Greenwood reached a mutual agreement that it would be best for him to resume his career elsewhere, separate from Old Trafford. This decision was made after Manchester United carefully analyzed the distressing content that was shared on social media platforms in January 2022.

Greenwood was charged by the Crown Prosecution Services with attempted rape, assault, and controlling and coercive behavior following the chilling images and audio recordings. This was concurrent with an alleged breach of his bail conditions occurring on October 15, 2022.

In February, Greenwood had all charges against him dropped due to the withdrawal of key witnesses and the emergence of new evidence. Following this, United initiated an investigation led by CEO Richard Arnold, chief operating officer Collette Roche, football director John Murtough, legal counsel Patrick Stewart, and chief communications officer Ellie Norman.

United's end result, according to information received by We News, did not align with the initial plan or the desired outcome of the club's football operations. The forward, whose value exceeded £100m at the time of his arrest last year, did not achieve the intended outcome for the club.

The club maintains that the return of the academy graduate to Carrington was just one of several scenarios considered and was not their ultimate decision at any given time. However, well-informed sources disagree with this assertion.

The club employees have claimed that the initial purpose was to reintegrate the forward into the team, which is why it was necessary to explain the decision to important parties, such as the women's team, before announcing it publicly.

These claims are backed by the delay in United's communication of their findings, which were originally scheduled to be shared before the beginning of the new Premier League season. However, this timeframe did not account for the participation of Manchester United players Mary Earps, Ella Toone, and Katie Zelem in the Women's World Cup, leading to the need for a change in plans.

United remained steadfast in their determination to make an unbiased decision grounded in factual evidence, despite the mounting internal and external pressures. However, they grossly underestimated the immense sentiment from their staff, supporters, and the wider public in favor of Greenwood's return. The initial indication, expressed in a preliminary statement issued on Wednesday, suggested United was facilitating the reintegration process. However, this stance proved increasingly unsustainable and untenable as Friday approached.

The most recent set of club statements acknowledges and accepts this fact. In a public letter, Arnold expressed his awareness of the difficulties Mason would encounter while trying to rebuild his career and raise a child with his partner under the intense scrutiny of Manchester United. Moreover, this situation has generated strong viewpoints, and it is my duty to minimize any disruptions to the unity we are striving to achieve within the club.

United's statements and Greenwood's remarks on Monday raise questions about their wording. The club claims they couldn't access specific evidence but still determined that the online material didn't present the whole story, and that Mason wasn't guilty of the initial charges against him.

While emphasizing the need for a decision based on complete information, they acknowledge that they didn't have the entire set of evidence available.

The 21-year-old acknowledges making mistakes for which he takes responsibility, according to the statement. Contrarily, Greenwood denies the accusations made against him but admits his role in the circumstances that led to the social media post.

Additionally, he mentioned that all charges were dropped in February and confirmed by the CPS.

Manchester United's communication regarding the decision is as perplexing as the path taken to arrive at it. Last Wednesday, in response to the vague statement issued by United, amidst reports suggesting they regarded domestic abuse charities unfavorably in relation to Greenwood's return to the first-team, Women's Aid contacted the club.

Their goal was clear and crucial: to enhance comprehension and awareness of an issue that impacted 1.7 million women in the UK in the previous year, a staggering statistic exacerbated by the fact that less than 24 percent of such offenses are reported to law enforcement. According to sources, this marked the first instance in a six-month procedure where United engaged in a dialogue with an organization specializing in aiding women affected by domestic and sexual abuse. It occurred solely because Women's Aid proactively took the lead.

United's investigation into Greenwood's arrest in January 2022 had shortcomings, with the most notable being their failure to involve charities that could have provided more insight and guidance throughout the process. The club's lack of understanding regarding domestic and sexual violence is evident in their statements and overall management of the situation.

United have consistently asserted that their focus was not on determining whether Greenwood had committed a criminal offense, but rather on assessing whether his actions aligned with the institution's desired values.

United stated that their main priority was to closely examine the context and circumstances surrounding Greenwood's arrest. Although they faced limitations in accessing certain evidence, which they acknowledged and respected, United ultimately determined that Mason was innocent of the charges against him. However, it is crucial to confront difficult realities regarding whether the club's handling of the situation aligned with the desired standards, considering the significant harm to its reputation endured in recent days.

United staff, irrespective of their roles, openly admit that if Greenwood had been an ordinary player, he would have been dismissed immediately when he got suspended. The club emphasizes their responsibility towards his well-being.

Reports suggest that initially, United were willing to sacrifice sponsors, significant commercial revenue, and face opposition in order to prioritize on-field performance.

That was until they witnessed the real scale of opposition to that decision.