Quite why esteemed journalists at The Times appear to have engaged in a game of one-upmanship as to who can get the single most ludicrous Mason Greenwood article past their editor is unknown, but Martin Samuel has clearly taken Henry Winter’s baffling opinion piece to heart because he dials the damaging nonsense up to 427 this weekend.
‘Manchester United have a duty of care to help Mason Greenwood face future’ is the archetypal Samuel headline: looking at a pressing subject matter from a different angle to present an alternative perspective. He is the devil’s advocate in every sense.
And that sub-headline of ‘If United take partial credit for the man Marcus Rashford has become, they must also take some responsibility for Greenwood’ is fucking despicable. Why use the name of a man who belongs nowhere near this story whatsoever?
But let’s get into the weeds of Samuel’s actual message. It starts with a mention of Greenwood’s ‘baggage’ and ‘obvious negatives’, terms which are doing an awful lot of heavy lifting. Then not content with needlessly and inexplicably dragging Rashford into the situation, he brings up a random club.
‘Not saying that they would but a club in Everton’s desperate state might be prepared to ride the backlash to secure such a goalscorer.’
Feels like you kind of are saying that they would.
‘Yet United could make it difficult for those opportunistically circling,’ Samuel continues. ‘Release Greenwood but with a statement that leant heavily on public image and reputation, on what a modern club stands for, on footballers as role models, on the rise of the women’s team and the message it would send to continue Greenwood’s employment.’
Any reason why this statement would not refer to doing the right and moral thing? Yet again – and a little louder for those in the back who are employed by The Times and want to make this solely about PR – this really is not solely about PR.
A number of rhetorical questions, and a risible description of how some working at Man Utd will remember Greenwood as ‘a smiling little boy’, follow. Samuel then asks: ‘Would they wish him destroyed, no matter what we believe we have seen or heard?’
And Mediawatch can only speak for itself but it knows damn well sure what it has seen and heard.
‘It is widely presumed that Greenwood can never represent United again, but is that so?’ is the last of those questions from Samuel – feel free to come up with an…
Click Here to Read the Full Original Article at Football365…