Debate Club – Friday 10th February

Topic: “This house believes that Mason Greenwood shouldn’t be allowed to return to training with the Manchester United team.”

The statement for debate comes to us this week by special request from Mr Waterson, and was, again, very hotly contested. Thomas N opened the debate for the proposition, arguing that the crimes Greenwood was accused of are so severe that he should not be allowed to return due to the loss of reputation that his club would incur. Leading the Opposition was Adam H, arguing that in 2023 we should not condemn by public opinion those who have been found to be legally innocent.

The proposition went on to argue that Manchester United themselves are conducting their own investigation, so should therefore be allowed to make their own decisions as a result of this investigation, and that the example of Prince Andrew shows that the legal system can be manipulated by those with wealth and power.

The opposition made a very prescient argument that reputation damage will not last forever, and that if the team is willing to forgive and Greenwood expresses remorse, then we should be able to move on as a society. 

In closing statements, both teams summarised their arguments well, with Thomas leading again for the proposition, reiterating that in the court of public opinion, Greenwood’s reputation has been irreparably damaged, and if Manchester United allowed him to return then they would also face scrutiny. However, it was Adam’s passionate rhetoric that led the opposition to be this week’s winner, and himself to be star debater, stating “Mason Greenwood has had all charges dropped, he is an innocent man in the eyes of the law, and this is all that needs to be said”.

Another rousing week in Debate Club, and we look forward to welcoming Ms Vitty back to co-chair this week.