Right now, whether or not there is a Manchester United future for Mason Greenwood should have nothing to do with Erik ten Hag.
Let’s get that clear.
If the club decides there IS a future for Greenwood at Old Trafford, then Ten Hag comes into the equation.
The owners and the senior executives, led by CEO Richard Arnold, can – after conducting “its own process” – decide to keep Greenwood on the payroll but Ten Hag would then decide whether or not he puts on one of the most famous jerseys not just in football, but in sport.
The owners and senior executives might think they should ask Ten Hag for input now … but they most certainly should not. They are the custodians of a grand, proud institution and, at this point, it is for them to decide whether Greenwood is able to represent that grand, proud institution and what it should stand for.
As a man against whom criminal charges have been dropped, Greenwood is, of course, free to pursue whatever professional ambitions he has. But Manchester United Football Club is free to wash its hands of him.
Manchester United Football Club is not the Crown Prosecution Service, it does not have an obligation to compile evidence against Greenwood that would lead to a criminal conviction.
Manchester United Football Club can look back at the circumstances that preceded the charges of attempted rape, controlling and coercive behaviour and assault, and decide if those circumstances compel them to believe Greenwood should not be part of an organisation that is part of the lives of millions of women, children and men.
If they were to terminate Greenwood’s contract, there could be legal ramifications in a civil sense but they would be irrelevant. This decision cannot be about money, it cannot be about the worth of Greenwood in the transfer market, it cannot be about whether Ten Hag would find the 21-year-old to be a useful striking option.
It cannot be influenced by whataboutery, by people saying ‘well, so-and-so did this and look where he is now’.
It cannot be swayed by what the club believes supporters will think.
It cannot be influenced by the prospect of Greenwood being recruited by another club were he to be released by United.
That, most definitely, is what would happen and if Greenwood returns to high-level football and plays to the standard he was already at, then the Football Association would have a decision to make down the line. But it would be the same decision that Manchester United has right now, only it would be about whether they thought it right Greenwood should represent his country, not his club.
Greenwood has been on United’s books since he was a boy and there must be people at the club who know him far better than any of us.
They will also have seen and heard the scenarios which came to light before the charges that were subsequently dropped when “a combination of the withdrawal of key witnesses and new material that came to light meant there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction.”
Now, it is over to the club and “its own process”.
Let’s hope and trust it is thorough … because while the Crown Prosecution Service concluded “there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction”, when it comes to being fit to represent a grand, proud institution such as Manchester United, Mason Greenwood still may have a case to answer.
