I find it hypocrtical of bodies such as Amnesty International to take umbrage with the Saudi royal family in their proposed ownership of Newcastle United. They claim human rights issues yet we have a Russian owner of Chelsea, Man.City owned by Abu Dhabi, and various American owners with very dodgy standards (the Glazers bought up Man.U with United's own money).
Newcastle fans have been desperate to return those halcyon memorable days under Kevin Keegan when they had a star-studded team. They have been blighted under the misanthropic control of Mike Ashley and his dour choice of management for such a potentially big club.
It would be double standards to apply a stricter examination of the Saudi conglomerate when many others have fell short of Premier League scrutiny before.
This is an exciting moment, to break up the mini-monopoly of the so-called "big six" and introduce competition from the most northerly club in the league!
I for one am delighted to see Newcastle return to former greatness and the injection of capital into English football is more than welcome.
076.gif
PS: Darren Bent announced on Talksport he is a Fulham fan. Good on him! 049:gif
I find it hard to think of Newcastle being run by Arabs but of course that is the way of things nowadays.
Still suspect there could be a language problem as the Saudis will be thinking they have to deal with plain English.
I wouldn't bet on many of the female side of the human race going to watch them, just a ton of fat beer bellies.
Also as a one Club City they should have a lot of fans and they should have achieved much more on the field of play.
The last time rhey opened up Newcastles Trophy Cabinet Adam & Eve fell out.
I think it is much too late to do anything about other countries buying into our football clubs. There will soon be a top 7 then 8 so on and so fourth. It still won't include Spurs. What a joke
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on October 07, 2021, 06:13:32 PM
I wouldn't bet on many of the female side of the human race going to watch them, just a ton of fat beer bellies.
Also as a one Club City they should have a lot of fans and they should have achieved much more on the field of play.
The last time rhey opened up Newcastles Trophy Cabinet Adam & Eve fell out.
Is it not a bit rich for any one of us to slate another clubs trophy cabinet?!
Quote from: Jamie88 on October 07, 2021, 06:32:29 PM
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on October 07, 2021, 06:13:32 PM
I wouldn't bet on many of the female side of the human race going to watch them, just a ton of fat beer bellies.
Also as a one Club City they should have a lot of fans and they should have achieved much more on the field of play.
The last time rhey opened up Newcastles Trophy Cabinet Adam & Eve fell out.
Is it not a bit rich for any one of us to slate another clubs trophy cabinet?!
I did not know we even had a Trophy Cabinet, and no it is not at all rich. So I shall say it again, the last time they opened up Newcastles Trophy Cabinet a Witchfinder General fell out.
Quite absurd to lump the American owners in with the others.
I'd not be delighted if we were taken over by the Saudis (and the assurances given mean bugger all from that quarter) or if we were owned by a Russian oligarch.
On a parallel note, it will be interesting to see if the ruler of Saudi gets ostrasized by the racing community following recent revelations and of course the alleged kidnapping. He probably owns too many horses in too many yards to expect to see him given the bum's rush he deserves.
Darren Bent has made it very clear on his many appearances on Talksport that he is, has always been and will forever be a Gunners fan.
Blimey, that Amanda Staveley is intense, I almost feel sorry for Brucie if he gets an exit meeting with her.
Wow, and no one mentions we were owned by an Egyptian so called ex arms dealer? Hypocrisy is alive and kicking.
Anyone having any misgivings regarding this deal check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLgIVYkbVz4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLgIVYkbVz4)
The Premier League has approved the takeover after receiving "legally binding assurances" that the Saudi state would not control the club.
Instead the Public Investment Fund (PIF), which will provide 80% of funds for the deal, is seen as separate to the state.
This is despite the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, being listed as chair of PIF.
Must have been a few Rolex going to Lancaster House
Quote from: Nick Bateman on October 07, 2021, 05:30:56 PM
I find it hypocrtical of bodies such as Amnesty International to take umbrage with the Saudi royal family in their proposed ownership of Newcastle United. They claim human rights issues yet we have a Russian owner of Chelsea, Man.City owned by Abu Dhabi, and various American owners with very dodgy standards (the Glazers bought up Man.U with United's own money).
Newcastle fans have been desperate to return those halcyon memorable days under Kevin Keegan when they had a star-studded team. They have been blighted under the misanthropic control of Mike Ashley and his dour choice of management for such a potentially big club.
It would be double standards to apply a stricter examination of the Saudi conglomerate when many others have fell short of Premier League scrutiny before.
This is an exciting moment, to break up the mini-monopoly of the so-called "big six" and introduce competition from the most northerly club in the league!
I for one am delighted to see Newcastle return to former greatness and the injection of capital into English football is more than welcome.
076.gif
PS: Darren Bent announced on Talksport he is a Fulham fan. Good on him! 049:gif
I think you are way off target if I may say so. The owner of Chelsea may be a Russian but he isn't the govenement of Russia, nor are the Glazers the President of the USA althogh you are closer with the current owner of Man City. No other owners come close to running their countries and so cannot control the human rights of them. However, no matter how you and the FA may dress this up, Newcastle are now owned by a regime whose treatment of women is mysogenistic to say the least, who use public beheadings to punish opponents and who are currently involved in a terrible war in Yeman at the cost of thousands of innocent people. What next, Daesh running Dulwich Hamlet? North Korea taking over Charlton. The FA are very weak and have shown themselves to put money before human rights in my opinion.
Quote from: sunburywhite on October 07, 2021, 07:59:02 PM
The Premier League has approved the takeover after receiving "legally binding assurances" that the Saudi state would not control the club.
Instead the Public Investment Fund (PIF), which will provide 80% of funds for the deal, is seen as separate to the state.
This is despite the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, being listed as chair of PIF.
Must have been a few Rolex going to Lancaster House
If the FA had any moral fibre they might be able to make themselves a backbone.
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 07, 2021, 10:40:43 PM
Quote from: Nick Bateman on October 07, 2021, 05:30:56 PM
I find it hypocrtical of bodies such as Amnesty International to take umbrage with the Saudi royal family in their proposed ownership of Newcastle United. They claim human rights issues yet we have a Russian owner of Chelsea, Man.City owned by Abu Dhabi, and various American owners with very dodgy standards (the Glazers bought up Man.U with United's own money).
Newcastle fans have been desperate to return those halcyon memorable days under Kevin Keegan when they had a star-studded team. They have been blighted under the misanthropic control of Mike Ashley and his dour choice of management for such a potentially big club.
It would be double standards to apply a stricter examination of the Saudi conglomerate when many others have fell short of Premier League scrutiny before.
This is an exciting moment, to break up the mini-monopoly of the so-called "big six" and introduce competition from the most northerly club in the league!
I for one am delighted to see Newcastle return to former greatness and the injection of capital into English football is more than welcome.
076.gif
PS: Darren Bent announced on Talksport he is a Fulham fan. Good on him! 049:gif
I think you are way off target if I may say so. The owner of Chelsea may be a Russian but he isn't the govenement of Russia, nor are the Glazers the President of the USA althogh you are closer with the current owner of Man City. No other owners come close to running their countries and so cannot control the human rights of them. However, no matter how you and the FA may dress this up, Newcastle are now owned by a regime whose treatment of women is mysogenistic to say the least, who use public beheadings to punish opponents and who are currently involved in a terrible war in Yeman at the cost of thousands of innocent people. What next, Daesh running Dulwich Hamlet? North Korea taking over Charlton. The FA are very weak and have shown themselves to put money before human rights in my opinion.
Bang on, the FA and their greasy mitts are brown enveloped here for this take over. Saudi ruling elite are, forgive the word "C***s and treat women like sh**e, anyone not of the rulling class is just a slave in that country. They are one step away from nazi's/stalin with their ideology.
Quote from: Nick Bateman on October 07, 2021, 07:40:51 PM
Anyone having any misgivings regarding this deal check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLgIVYkbVz4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLgIVYkbVz4)
I was hoping this was going to be women celebrating freedom in the Kingdom and the end of executions.
Quote from: HobGoblin on October 07, 2021, 10:44:32 PM
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 07, 2021, 10:40:43 PM
Quote from: Nick Bateman on October 07, 2021, 05:30:56 PM
I find it hypocrtical of bodies such as Amnesty International to take umbrage with the Saudi royal family in their proposed ownership of Newcastle United. They claim human rights issues yet we have a Russian owner of Chelsea, Man.City owned by Abu Dhabi, and various American owners with very dodgy standards (the Glazers bought up Man.U with United's own money).
Newcastle fans have been desperate to return those halcyon memorable days under Kevin Keegan when they had a star-studded team. They have been blighted under the misanthropic control of Mike Ashley and his dour choice of management for such a potentially big club.
It would be double standards to apply a stricter examination of the Saudi conglomerate when many others have fell short of Premier League scrutiny before.
This is an exciting moment, to break up the mini-monopoly of the so-called "big six" and introduce competition from the most northerly club in the league!
I for one am delighted to see Newcastle return to former greatness and the injection of capital into English football is more than welcome.
076.gif
PS: Darren Bent announced on Talksport he is a Fulham fan. Good on him! 049:gif
I think you are way off target if I may say so. The owner of Chelsea may be a Russian but he isn't the govenement of Russia, nor are the Glazers the President of the USA althogh you are closer with the current owner of Man City. No other owners come close to running their countries and so cannot control the human rights of them. However, no matter how you and the FA may dress this up, Newcastle are now owned by a regime whose treatment of women is mysogenistic to say the least, who use public beheadings to punish opponents and who are currently involved in a terrible war in Yeman at the cost of thousands of innocent people. What next, Daesh running Dulwich Hamlet? North Korea taking over Charlton. The FA are very weak and have shown themselves to put money before human rights in my opinion.
Bang on, the FA and their greasy mitts are brown enveloped here for this take over. Saudi ruling elite are, forgive the word "C***s and treat women like sh**e, anyone not of the rulling class is just a slave in that country. They are one step away from nazi's/stalin with their ideology.
My maxim is that if you are on the same side as Saudi Arabia you are probably on the wrong side.
Quote from: blingo on October 07, 2021, 07:20:22 PM
Wow, and no one mentions we were owned by an Egyptian so called ex arms dealer? Hypocrisy is alive and kicking.
And he was ruler of which country?
Quote from: sunburywhite on October 07, 2021, 07:59:02 PM
The Premier League has approved the takeover after receiving "legally binding assurances" that the Saudi state would not control the club.
Instead the Public Investment Fund (PIF), which will provide 80% of funds for the deal, is seen as separate to the state.
This is despite the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, being listed as chair of PIF.
Must have been a few Rolex going to Lancaster House
Think it was a case of ok we want show our own streams of the football and use the legit one by Bien so the FA can get more money next tv right issue .
Also, all these Newcastle fans are going to be so peed off when season ticket prices rise by over 50% to pay for the mercenaries that will join over the next few windows
Quote from: Nero on October 07, 2021, 10:52:48 PM
Quote from: sunburywhite on October 07, 2021, 07:59:02 PM
The Premier League has approved the takeover after receiving "legally binding assurances" that the Saudi state would not control the club.
Instead the Public Investment Fund (PIF), which will provide 80% of funds for the deal, is seen as separate to the state.
This is despite the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, being listed as chair of PIF.
Must have been a few Rolex going to Lancaster House
Think it was a case of ok we want show our own streams of the football and use the legit one by Bien so the FA can get more money next tv right issue .
Also, all these Newcastle fans are going to be so peed off when season ticket prices rise by over 50% to pay for the mercenaries that will join over the next few windows
Lets see how long before they are moaning again.
It's a shame that the ongoing joke of Newcastle United seems to be over now, and I have mixed feelings behind the reasons for it.
You can't blame Newcastle fans for being over the moon about is all but it does stink. Again, not Newcastle's problem, this is down to those who have allowed these kind of takeovers to happen, despite these people having a less than pleasant story behind them.
The rules need to be changed regarding fit and proper owners, it 100% should not be about just being able to show a big bank acccount.
Poor chap walked into an Embassy, then never came out, go figure, what the Premier League are thinking. A planned 'Assassination', the world turned a 'blind eye' so has the football world.
I wonder if potential players will 'boycott' the club because of the owner.
Historically, the due diligence and ethical standard that's been applied to these types transactions has fallen short.
That in itself is not a good reason to not apply a more ethical approach going forward. It's not hypocrisy to do so, it's just holding ourselves to a higher standard today.
Greed is the only snake that can never be charmed.
Quote from: blingo on October 07, 2021, 07:20:22 PM
Wow, and no one mentions we were owned by an Egyptian so called ex arms dealer? Hypocrisy is alive and kicking.
My sentiments too. Our Premier and Football League has been very deep in excreta for a very long time and another pile of manure changes the theme not one jot.
Quote from: Nick Bateman on October 07, 2021, 05:30:56 PM
I find it hypocrtical of bodies such as Amnesty International to take umbrage with the Saudi royal family in their proposed ownership of Newcastle United. They claim human rights issues yet we have a Russian owner of Chelsea, Man.City owned by Abu Dhabi, and various American owners with very dodgy standards (the Glazers bought up Man.U with United's own money).
Newcastle fans have been desperate to return those halcyon memorable days under Kevin Keegan when they had a star-studded team. They have been blighted under the misanthropic control of Mike Ashley and his dour choice of management for such a potentially big club.
It would be double standards to apply a stricter examination of the Saudi conglomerate when many others have fell short of Premier League scrutiny before.
This is an exciting moment, to break up the mini-monopoly of the so-called "big six" and introduce competition from the most northerly club in the league!
I for one am delighted to see Newcastle return to former greatness and the injection of capital into English football is more than welcome.
076.gif
PS: Darren Bent announced on Talksport he is a Fulham fan. Good on him! 049:gif
After this controversial statement you have made regarding the Newcastle United take over. I have been inundated with a profusion of women holding a rolling pin in each hand demanding I inform them of your address of the premises you squat in. As they wish to give you a history lesson in the treatment of fellow human beings especially of the female variety.
Naturally I gave them the information they required.
Therefore may I suggest you put the kettle on in anticipation of their arrival and a large supply of tea cakes may also be in order.
Quote from: toshes mate on October 08, 2021, 09:10:33 AM
Quote from: blingo on October 07, 2021, 07:20:22 PM
Wow, and no one mentions we were owned by an Egyptian so called ex arms dealer? Hypocrisy is alive and kicking.
My sentiments too. Our Premier and Football League has been very deep in excreta for a very long time and another pile of manure changes the theme not one jot.
An unfair comparison to Mr Al Fayed. I don't recall him ordering the assination of any journalists or sanctioning beheadings. Nor subjugating women or waging war on a neighbor.
"An unfair comparison to Mr Al Fayed. I don't recall him ordering the assination of any journalists or sanctioning beheadings. Nor subjugating women or waging war on a neighbor."
Not only that, the complaints seem to be (a) he is Egyptian and (b) had been in the arms trade.
The first is at a minimum zenophobic and at worse racist. The second, which may or may not be true, means he had dealings in matters of which the poster does not prove, though legal. There are light years between legal involvement in businesses of which one may disapprove (of which there are many that at least some group target with their disapproval) and the kind of thing The Old Count fairly summarises.
Sums it up nicely
https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2021/oct/08/saudi-takeover-of-newcastle-leaves-human-rights-to-fog-on-the-tyne?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
It really is a case of where we want to draw the line. Governments deal with despots and killers and make fraudulent decisions and deals.
Do we insist that football clubs should be our moral compass instead?
Sport is often held up as some sort of arbiter in taste. How dare they take money from gambling and drinks and fast food companies. How awful that some sports personalities are so over paid.
The people that run our sports organisations have much to answer for. Look at the World Cup and The Olympics. Now so full of questionable ethics and decisions.
Where do we draw the line? It really is up to us. But making a football club guilty with all that goes on in and around it. Is a bit like criticising a karaoke song a politician sings. Really we are picking on the wrong things when there are bigger things to debate and feel angry about and try and do something about. But we don't. We are led by the nose like a cow to slaughter while complaining the grass could taste nicer.
I agree there is a degree of hypocrisy involved but the whole thing is a matter of degree. Very few nations or individual owners are totally and utterly squeeky clean so it's about where you draw the line. Not easy and there will always be argument, however I think most people would agree that a line has to be drawn somewhere.
Compared to many of the other countries mentioned on this thread Saudi has a particularly poor human rights record. I worked in the ME region for years and did my very best to avoid working there because of my misgivings,relatively but on one of the few occassions I was there for any length of time my government client invited me to attend a public beheading - he genuinely thought I would enjoy the exerience! (admitedly that was quite some years back).
Anyway my point is that it will take the wisdom of Jove to decide which owners and nations should fail any sort of improved proper owners test. Not something I think many of us would find easy if given the task.
Quote from: Twig on October 08, 2021, 10:28:41 AM
I agree there is a degree of hypocrisy involved but the whole thing is a matter of degree. Very few nations or individual owners are totally and utterly squeeky clean so it's about where you draw the line. Not easy and there will always be argument, however I think most people would agree that a line has to be drawn somewhere.
Compared to many of the other countries mentioned on this thread Saudi has a particularly poor human rights record. I worked in the ME region for years and did my very best to avoid working there because of my misgivings,relatively but on one of the few occassions I was there for any length of time my government client invited me to attend a public beheading - he genuinely thought I would enjoy the exerience! (admitedly that was quite some years back).
Anyway my point is that it will take the wisdom of Jove to decide which owners and nations should fail any sort of improved proper owners test. Not something I think many of us would find easy if given the task.
For me it would be a quite simple case of a) If it is an individual they are not linked to organised crime or corruption and aren't someone who is an asset stripper b) If it is a govenment it recognises universal human rights, allows universal sufferage, is not racist or mysogenistic or engaged in wars of agression against its neighbours - all of which Saudi Arabia fails.
For those people who thinking making such a judgement is difficult just imagine living in the state in discussion as a woman, as someone from the LGBGTQ+ community, being a migrant worker or wanting to have freedom of expression or religion. If you can't do these things you must recognise that the regime in question is not fit to run a football club in the UK.
Quote from: Lighthouse on October 08, 2021, 10:27:49 AM
It really is a case of where we want to draw the line. Governments deal with despots and killers and make fraudulent decisions and deals.
Do we insist that football clubs should be our moral compass instead?
Sport is often held up as some sort of arbiter in taste. How dare they take money from gambling and drinks and fast food companies. How awful that some sports personalities are so over paid.
The people that run our sports organisations have much to answer for. Look at the World Cup and The Olympics. Now so full of questionable ethics and decisions.
Where do we draw the line? It really is up to us. But making a football club guilty with all that goes on in and around it. Is a bit like criticising a karaoke song a politician sings. Really we are picking on the wrong things when there are bigger things to debate and feel angry about and try and do something about. But we don't. We are led by the nose like a cow to slaughter while complaining the grass could taste nicer.
I do not think the UK should have Saudi Arabia as an ally and I do not believe that having as the direct owners of a premier league club a family that commit the murder of one of its opponents on foreign soil is a standard we should aim for. Would you have supported Pol Pot owning Fulham knowing about the killing fields? Would you have welcomed Idi Armin as a board member knowing what he was doing in Uganda? Would you have cheered on Hitler buying a stake in your company knowing about the concentration camps? If the answer is no then you can't just say "well they are friends with them so why can't I be?" in my opinion.
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 08, 2021, 10:49:26 AM
Quote from: Lighthouse on October 08, 2021, 10:27:49 AM
It really is a case of where we want to draw the line. Governments deal with despots and killers and make fraudulent decisions and deals.
Do we insist that football clubs should be our moral compass instead?
Sport is often held up as some sort of arbiter in taste. How dare they take money from gambling and drinks and fast food companies. How awful that some sports personalities are so over paid.
The people that run our sports organisations have much to answer for. Look at the World Cup and The Olympics. Now so full of questionable ethics and decisions.
Where do we draw the line? It really is up to us. But making a football club guilty with all that goes on in and around it. Is a bit like criticising a karaoke song a politician sings. Really we are picking on the wrong things when there are bigger things to debate and feel angry about and try and do something about. But we don't. We are led by the nose like a cow to slaughter while complaining the grass could taste nicer.
I do not think the UK should have Saudi Arabia as an ally and I do not believe that having as the direct owners of a premier league club a family that commit the murder of one of its opponents on foreign soil is a standard we should aim for. Would you have supported Pol Pot owning Fulham knowing about the killing fields? Would you have welcomed Idi Armin as a board member knowing what he was doing in Uganda? Would you have cheered on Hitler buying a stake in your company knowing about the concentration camps? If the answer is no then you can't just say "well they are friends with them so why can't I be?" in my opinion.
By answer to all those things is why in Gods name did I wait until my football club or company was involved before I showed any sign of moral backbone? Shouldn't the time to complain and argue and protest come well before these people came to power or having come to power object to my Government acknowledging them. My ethics shouldn't start to be pricked only with sport or when I am personally involved. If I accept my Government or my favourite cake company is doing business with these people. Then it is all a bit rich me complaining when my football club becomes involved.
Quote from: Lighthouse on October 08, 2021, 11:08:27 AM
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 08, 2021, 10:49:26 AM
Quote from: Lighthouse on October 08, 2021, 10:27:49 AM
It really is a case of where we want to draw the line. Governments deal with despots and killers and make fraudulent decisions and deals.
Do we insist that football clubs should be our moral compass instead?
Sport is often held up as some sort of arbiter in taste. How dare they take money from gambling and drinks and fast food companies. How awful that some sports personalities are so over paid.
The people that run our sports organisations have much to answer for. Look at the World Cup and The Olympics. Now so full of questionable ethics and decisions.
Where do we draw the line? It really is up to us. But making a football club guilty with all that goes on in and around it. Is a bit like criticising a karaoke song a politician sings. Really we are picking on the wrong things when there are bigger things to debate and feel angry about and try and do something about. But we don't. We are led by the nose like a cow to slaughter while complaining the grass could taste nicer.
I do not think the UK should have Saudi Arabia as an ally and I do not believe that having as the direct owners of a premier league club a family that commit the murder of one of its opponents on foreign soil is a standard we should aim for. Would you have supported Pol Pot owning Fulham knowing about the killing fields? Would you have welcomed Idi Armin as a board member knowing what he was doing in Uganda? Would you have cheered on Hitler buying a stake in your company knowing about the concentration camps? If the answer is no then you can't just say "well they are friends with them so why can't I be?" in my opinion.
By answer to all those things is why in Gods name did I wait until my football club or company was involved before I showed any sign of moral backbone? Shouldn't the time to complain and argue and protest come well before these people came to power or having come to power object to my Government acknowledging them. My ethics shouldn't start to be pricked only with sport or when I am personally involved. If I accept my Government or my favourite cake company is doing business with these people. Then it is all a bit rich me complaining when my football club becomes involved.
That may be the case but I can only speak for myself and as I have stated earlier my membership of Amnesty Internation and Anti-Slavery international along with my regular contributions to Unicef to help the Yemani children caught up in Saudi's war on them means that it would be hypocrisy itself to pretend that I think this investment into the PL is a good thing.
Are we the bad guys?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpZ8EkK3eWY
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 07, 2021, 10:47:10 PM
Quote from: blingo on October 07, 2021, 07:20:22 PM
Wow, and no one mentions we were owned by an Egyptian so called ex arms dealer? Hypocrisy is alive and kicking.
And he was ruler of which country?
And what difference does that make Mr T??? Do arms not kill people? Are the suppliers of those arms any less guilty than the Rulers/leaders of the countries that buy them?
"Do arms not kill people? Are the suppliers of those arms any less guilty than the Rulers/leaders of the countries that buy them?"
We'd have had problems stopping Hitler or that little general from Argentina without arms. All countries need arms to protect themselves from other countries. Unless we intend to rely on stones against guns, it follows there need to be an armament industry.
Quote from: blingo on October 08, 2021, 12:41:19 PM
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 07, 2021, 10:47:10 PM
Quote from: blingo on October 07, 2021, 07:20:22 PM
Wow, and no one mentions we were owned by an Egyptian so called ex arms dealer? Hypocrisy is alive and kicking.
And he was ruler of which country?
And what difference does that make Mr T??? Do arms not kill people? Are the suppliers of those arms any less guilty than the Rulers/leaders of the countries that buy them?
Yes they are - Walmart sells guns so is Walmart the same as Putin who ordered his troops to attack and take over Crimea? You might as well blame the post room person in Shell for an oil spill. Also i have found no evidence that Mo sold any arms so could you supply the evidence as otherwise this discussion is irrelevant.
Quote from: The Old Count on October 08, 2021, 09:22:06 AM
Quote from: toshes mate on October 08, 2021, 09:10:33 AM
Quote from: blingo on October 07, 2021, 07:20:22 PM
Wow, and no one mentions we were owned by an Egyptian so called ex arms dealer? Hypocrisy is alive and kicking.
My sentiments too. Our Premier and Football League has been very deep in excreta for a very long time and another pile of manure changes the theme not one jot.
An unfair comparison to Mr Al Fayed. I don't recall him ordering the assination of any journalists or sanctioning beheadings. Nor subjugating women or waging war on a neighbor.
Never bend the rules. You bend the rules a little bit and then it's a slippery slope.
Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right. Besides, I don't recall Russia or the UAE going to a foreign country and murdering a journalist and this being signed off right from the top of government.
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 08, 2021, 10:43:29 AM
Quote from: Twig on October 08, 2021, 10:28:41 AM
I agree there is a degree of hypocrisy involved but the whole thing is a matter of degree. Very few nations or individual owners are totally and utterly squeeky clean so it's about where you draw the line. Not easy and there will always be argument, however I think most people would agree that a line has to be drawn somewhere.
Compared to many of the other countries mentioned on this thread Saudi has a particularly poor human rights record. I worked in the ME region for years and did my very best to avoid working there because of my misgivings,relatively but on one of the few occassions I was there for any length of time my government client invited me to attend a public beheading - he genuinely thought I would enjoy the exerience! (admitedly that was quite some years back).
Anyway my point is that it will take the wisdom of Jove to decide which owners and nations should fail any sort of improved proper owners test. Not something I think many of us would find easy if given the task.
For me it would be a quite simple case of a) If it is an individual they are not linked to organised crime or corruption and aren't someone who is an asset stripper b) If it is a govenment it recognises universal human rights, allows universal sufferage, is not racist or mysogenistic or engaged in wars of agression against its neighbours - all of which Saudi Arabia fails.
For those people who thinking making such a judgement is difficult just imagine living in the state in discussion as a woman, as someone from the LGBGTQ+ community, being a migrant worker or wanting to have freedom of expression or religion. If you can't do these things you must recognise that the regime in question is not fit to run a football club in the UK.
Terry I understand where you are coming from and sympathise with your view but I just don't think it's that simple to establish the criteria. For example, asset stripping wasn't illegal last time I checked. As to the LGBTQ+ community, well right now that would probably rule out wealth funds and politicians from a host of countries (but again it depends on how you define things like "freedom of expression"). I'm not arguing against a better fit and proper test, just pointing out that it isn't simple.
Quote from: Nick Bateman on October 07, 2021, 07:40:51 PM
Anyone having any misgivings regarding this deal check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLgIVYkbVz4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLgIVYkbVz4)
They are just showing any lack of class, no doubt thinking they will have a team of the best players in the World. Not sure myself as they will have to show some success before any of the top players turn up.
Quote from: Oakeshott on October 08, 2021, 01:20:42 PM
"Do arms not kill people? Are the suppliers of those arms any less guilty than the Rulers/leaders of the countries that buy them?"
We'd have had problems stopping Hitler or that little general from Argentina without arms. All countries need arms to protect themselves from other countries. Unless we intend to rely on stones against guns, it follows there need to be an armament industry.
[/quote
More to the point. Could Hitler have done what he did if no one had sold him the arms???
Think Saudis still cut the hands off of thieves
so will make the Mexican wave interesting at Newcastle..
No doubt Shearer will be the "figurehead apologist" for the new owners and will gloss over the appalling human rights record of Saudi Arabia. I'd like to think that Lineker will put Shearer on the spot on his next MOTD appearance and grill him hard about his views on human rights and the new owners; but somehow I doubt that will happen.
Quote from: Twig on October 08, 2021, 02:57:04 PM
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 08, 2021, 10:43:29 AM
Quote from: Twig on October 08, 2021, 10:28:41 AM
I agree there is a degree of hypocrisy involved but the whole thing is a matter of degree. Very few nations or individual owners are totally and utterly squeeky clean so it's about where you draw the line. Not easy and there will always be argument, however I think most people would agree that a line has to be drawn somewhere.
Compared to many of the other countries mentioned on this thread Saudi has a particularly poor human rights record. I worked in the ME region for years and did my very best to avoid working there because of my misgivings,relatively but on one of the few occassions I was there for any length of time my government client invited me to attend a public beheading - he genuinely thought I would enjoy the exerience! (admitedly that was quite some years back).
Anyway my point is that it will take the wisdom of Jove to decide which owners and nations should fail any sort of improved proper owners test. Not something I think many of us would find easy if given the task.
For me it would be a quite simple case of a) If it is an individual they are not linked to organised crime or corruption and aren't someone who is an asset stripper b) If it is a govenment it recognises universal human rights, allows universal sufferage, is not racist or mysogenistic or engaged in wars of agression against its neighbours - all of which Saudi Arabia fails.
For those people who thinking making such a judgement is difficult just imagine living in the state in discussion as a woman, as someone from the LGBGTQ+ community, being a migrant worker or wanting to have freedom of expression or religion. If you can't do these things you must recognise that the regime in question is not fit to run a football club in the UK.
Terry I understand where you are coming from and sympathise with your view but I just don't think it's that simple to establish the criteria. For example, asset stripping wasn't illegal last time I checked. As to the LGBTQ+ community, well right now that would probably rule out wealth funds and politicians from a host of countries (but again it depends on how you define things like "freedom of expression"). I'm not arguing against a better fit and proper test, just pointing out that it isn't simple.
Thanks. In my world all that host of politicians and wealth funds wouldn't be welcome :dft012:
Quote from: blingo on October 08, 2021, 05:35:19 PM
Quote from: Oakeshott on October 08, 2021, 01:20:42 PM
"Do arms not kill people? Are the suppliers of those arms any less guilty than the Rulers/leaders of the countries that buy them?"
We'd have had problems stopping Hitler or that little general from Argentina without arms. All countries need arms to protect themselves from other countries. Unless we intend to rely on stones against guns, it follows there need to be an armament industry.
[/quote
More to the point. Could Hitler have done what he did if no one had sold him the arms???
Actually he didn't buy the armaments - Germany made them, companies like Bosch, Krupps, Mercedes, Hugo Boss, BMW and AEG etc made them or contributed to the war effort. Germany was under embargo and was not allowed to build up its armed forces but there were plenty of German companies willing to ignore the nasty side of the Nazis.
Quote from: Ludlow Richard on October 08, 2021, 09:43:17 PM
No doubt Shearer will be the "figurehead apologist" for the new owners and will gloss over the appalling human rights record of Saudi Arabia. I'd like to think that Lineker will put Shearer on the spot on his next MOTD appearance and grill him hard about his views on human rights and the new owners; but somehow I doubt that will happen.
he has aknowledged it "We have that chance now and I'm glad. I want my club to represent my city and my region and not some distant, authoritarian regime, but it looks like the second thing is opening the way to the first. Maybe it's just our go.""
Quote from: john dempsey on October 08, 2021, 05:48:14 PM
Think Saudis still cut the hands off of thieves
so will make the Mexican wave interesting at Newcastle..
Just interested at the people outside the ground celebrating with cans of lager..wonder what the owners think?
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 08, 2021, 11:12:20 PM
Quote from: blingo on October 08, 2021, 05:35:19 PM
Quote from: Oakeshott on October 08, 2021, 01:20:42 PM
"Do arms not kill people? Are the suppliers of those arms any less guilty than the Rulers/leaders of the countries that buy them?"
We'd have had problems stopping Hitler or that little general from Argentina without arms. All countries need arms to protect themselves from other countries. Unless we intend to rely on stones against guns, it follows there need to be an armament industry.
[/quote
More to the point. Could Hitler have done what he did if no one had sold him the arms???
Actually he didn't buy the armaments - Germany made them, companies like Bosch, Krupps, Mercedes, Hugo Boss, BMW and AEG etc made them or contributed to the war effort. Germany was under embargo and was not allowed to build up its armed forces but there were plenty of German companies willing to ignore the nasty side of the Nazis.
With borrowed money Mr T which is pretty much the same thing.
They also stole 15 tonnes of gold and untold millions from the Jewish people.
Quote from: Mitrovic the warrior on October 08, 2021, 02:02:54 PM
Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right. Besides, I don't recall Russia or the UAE going to a foreign country and murdering a journalist and this being signed off right from the top of government.
Nope, Russia most definitely draws the line at poisoning British citizens in Italian restaurants in Salisbury
Quote from: MartyFFC on October 09, 2021, 08:42:10 AM
Quote from: Mitrovic the warrior on October 08, 2021, 02:02:54 PM
Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right. Besides, I don't recall Russia or the UAE going to a foreign country and murdering a journalist and this being signed off right from the top of government.
Nope, Russia most definitely draws the line at poisoning British citizens in Italian restaurants in Salisbury
I just looked at this thread and couldn't work out if Mitrovic the Warrior's comment was satire. If he really believes that Russia doesn't sanction killings on foreign soil, what sort of sheltered life does he live?
It's revealing when China, a country not noted for its human rights, has an undue influence not only within the UN but in British and European football and much else too. That smartphone, laptop, TV, TV box or smartUSB was most likely manufactured in China the greatest source of fossil fuel emissions in the world (but not per capita since that is the US). The world order isn't exactly squeaky clean, people aren't either, and it isn't getting any better.
Has anyone on here actually been to Saudi ?
Quote from: Terry Towling on October 08, 2021, 11:12:20 PM
Quote from: blingo on October 08, 2021, 05:35:19 PM
Quote from: Oakeshott on October 08, 2021, 01:20:42 PM
"Do arms not kill people? Are the suppliers of those arms any less guilty than the Rulers/leaders of the countries that buy them?"
We'd have had problems stopping Hitler or that little general from Argentina without arms. All countries need arms to protect themselves from other countries. Unless we intend to rely on stones against guns, it follows there need to be an armament industry.
[/quote
More to the point. Could Hitler have done what he did if no one had sold him the arms???
Actually he didn't buy the armaments - Germany made them, companies like Bosch, Krupps, Mercedes, Hugo Boss, BMW and AEG etc made them or contributed to the war effort. Germany was under embargo and was not allowed to build up its armed forces but there were plenty of German companies willing to ignore the nasty side of the Nazis.
Those firms used slave labour during the war, under the harshest possible conditions, with many dying after only a few weeks, to be replaced with more of those seized
from all over Europe by the invading German army. Continental Tyres firm was another I was just reading about that did this, with workers from a notorious concertation camp, but these firms, carried on as normal after the war.
Very few Nazi's involved in The Holocaust and Germany's many war crimes were tried and punished after the War.
Sympathetic regimes in Argentina, and The Vatican in Rome, ran an escape route, and many leading ex -Nazi's built new lives and identities in Latin America.
And then the US and British, began to see the new Communist regimes as more of a threat and turned their attentions away from Nazi hunting, to opposing the new Communist regimes in Eastern Europe, even recruiting ex-Nazis as spies.
Am I culpable when I but Continental tyres for my bike?
It does show how hard it is to make moral judgements.
Fans themselves, understandably maybe, forget their moral principles re owners of their own clubs.
Geordie fans are falling over themselves, even a leading LGBTQ Newcastle fan rep, to say how these new Saudi owners are not representing the Saudi government, and anyway it's our government's problem, not the club's.
But i can see that it does seem hypocritical maybe, if you stop the Saudi's bid, but not Man City's Dubai owners, for example, with a similar record on human rights.
Quote from: Luka on October 09, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
Has anyone on here actually been to Saudi ?
Certainly not. Can't get a beer there.
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on October 08, 2021, 09:17:32 AM
Quote from: Nick Bateman on October 07, 2021, 05:30:56 PM
I find it hypocrtical of bodies such as Amnesty International to take umbrage with the Saudi royal family in their proposed ownership of Newcastle United. They claim human rights issues yet we have a Russian owner of Chelsea, Man.City owned by Abu Dhabi, and various American owners with very dodgy standards (the Glazers bought up Man.U with United's own money).
Newcastle fans have been desperate to return those halcyon memorable days under Kevin Keegan when they had a star-studded team. They have been blighted under the misanthropic control of Mike Ashley and his dour choice of management for such a potentially big club.
It would be double standards to apply a stricter examination of the Saudi conglomerate when many others have fell short of Premier League scrutiny before.
This is an exciting moment, to break up the mini-monopoly of the so-called "big six" and introduce competition from the most northerly club in the league!
I for one am delighted to see Newcastle return to former greatness and the injection of capital into English football is more than welcome.
076.gif
PS: Darren Bent announced on Talksport he is a Fulham fan. Good on him! 049:gif
After this controversial statement you have made regarding the Newcastle United take over. I have been inundated with a profusion of women holding a rolling pin in each hand demanding I inform them of your address of the premises you squat in. As they wish to give you a history lesson in the treatment of fellow human beings especially of the female variety.
Naturally I gave them the information they required.
Therefore may I suggest you put the kettle on in anticipation of their arrival and a large supply of tea cakes may also be in order.
Plenty of
hot totty coming my way, it seems. Bring it on, I say!
Regards
Saudi, my main gripe with them is their protrated war against Yemen to restore a corrupt and heinous despot to the throne, and the Khashoggi murder was of course an outrage.
But I believe sport and politics should never mix. One recalls Sheikh Mansour watching Manchester City with Richard Scudamore, then EPL chair, sat alongside him every game, basically intimidating referees to favour Man.City (or else). One does not wish the same with the new owners of the Toon Army, and there the matter should end. We already have many unscrupulous owners of Premier League clubs, Abramovich has an alleged history of bribery and corruption as well as other more nefarious deeds, yet does the media condemn him or
Chelsea's dark arts whenever they play a football match?
Motor racing still hosts a grand prix in Dubai so where is the clamour from the do-gooders there or does it only apply to football when they take umbrage?!
In the end, the Newcastle fans have desired this and how can one not have affinity with the geordies who now have a chance to upset the "big six" and challenge them for honours with a cash-bought team same as every other wealthy club.
That's the final straw for me. The Premier League has been corrupt to the core for years now but this is on a whole new level. I simply cannot support anything related to the PL anymore. This of course means I won't be able to watch a single game if we're promoted next season. It's sad but there are more important things in life than football, like taking a stand against totalitarian regimes, oppression, torture, murder, mutilation, public executions, corruption, etc. etc. Some of you will think I'm overreacting but when the Premier League actively support all of the above I'm out.
Quote from: Penfold on October 09, 2021, 01:47:50 PM
Quote from: Luka on October 09, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
Has anyone on here actually been to Saudi ?
Certainly not. Can't get a beer there.
That will change as there is a big drive to get tourism into the place. Sometime soon I believe you will be able to get alcohol in tourist hotels.
Not that that will be a new experience to the hypocritical white robed Saudi elite you see buying bottles of expensive booze straight after disembarking flights to Dubai International then being whisked off in limo's to indulge in ultra nice hotels and expensive hookers.
Quote from: Luka on October 09, 2021, 03:52:10 PM
Quote from: Penfold on October 09, 2021, 01:47:50 PM
Quote from: Luka on October 09, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
Has anyone on here actually been to Saudi ?
Certainly not. Can't get a beer there.
That will change as there is a big drive to get tourism into the place. Sometime soon I believe you will be able to get alcohol in tourist hotels.
Not that that will be a new experience to the hypocritical white robed Saudi elite you see buying bottles of expensive booze straight after disembarking flights to Dubai International then being whisked off in limo's to indulge in ultra nice hotels and expensive hookers.
😂 you ain't wrong there
"That's the final straw for me. The Premier League has been corrupt to the core for years now but this is on a whole new level. I simply cannot support anything related to the PL anymore. This of course means I won't be able to watch a single game if we're promoted next season. It's sad but there are more important things in life than football, like taking a stand against totalitarian regimes, oppression, torture, murder, mutilation, public executions, corruption, etc. etc. Some of you will think I'm overreacting but when the Premier League actively support all of the above I'm out."
It is interesting that the other nineteen Premiership clubs seem to have concerns about all that, though doubtless cynics will write them off as self-interest in not having a strong Newcastle team.
I agree with Nick Bateman that it would be good if Newcastle can join or beat the current big clubs, the issue is how.
And what is concerning is the naivity of the PL in thinking that there is a real difference between a regime which does all the things you list and an investment outfit headed by one of the rulers.
It is a bit like the British government allowing Hauwei into our telecomms thinking that China has genuine private sector companies like the West and that the company won't do what the regime say (I would, if I worked for Huawei - better than being killed by the ghasstly regime).
The idea that sport and politics should be kept separate is idealistic but also naive, and has been since the 1930s.
Like you, I'm out if the PL allow the takeover as it seems they have. Bad enough that they have let themselves get involved in promoting BLM rather than continuing to work against racism (the two being very different). The one plus over the last week was the jailing of the WBA fan who was found guilty of racist abise.
Quote from: Luka on October 09, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
Has anyone on here actually been to Saudi ?
Yes, I've visited KSA many times and worked for clients there. I had to as it was part of my job but always had misgivings and tried to minimise my involvement by focussing on clients elsewhere in the Middle East. Nonetheless KSA is such a financialn powerhouse that it was impossible to avoid.
As a matter of interest, why do you ask?
Quote from: Mitrovic the warrior on October 08, 2021, 02:02:54 PM
Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right. Besides, I don't recall Russia or the UAE going to a foreign country and murdering a journalist and this being signed off right from the top of government.
Lol, this can't be serious right?
Quote from: Twig on October 09, 2021, 07:48:02 PM
Quote from: Mitrovic the warrior on October 08, 2021, 02:02:54 PM
Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right. Besides, I don't recall Russia or the UAE going to a foreign country and murdering a journalist and this being signed off right from the top of government.
Lol, this can't be serious right?
Russia doesn't need to go abroad to kill journalists, they do it at home.
Just stated on 5 Live, BBC Radio, Steven Nolan Show by gay rights activist Peter Tatchell -
"The Prem lifted it's ban on the Saudi deal (which Tatchell thinks is terrible because of the Saudi regime's attitudes to women and gays - women still in prison for campaigning for women being allowed to drive, and the death penalty for being gay) as a quid pro pro, after the Saudi government lifted it's ban on Prem TV broadcasts, and agreed to ban pirate Prem broadcasts."
I'm just reporting this, don't know if it's true.
It is true apparently.
Most countries in that part of the world are misogynistic, intolerant, deeply homophobic with appalling human rights records. You're likely to be imprisoned, flogged or chemically castrated for being gay in UAE; yet I don't hear anyone complaining about Man City's ownership. It's all about £££££££££. It will certainly be an interesting juxtaposition in Qatar, watching players taking the knee with their rainbow laces in a country where structural racism and homophobia are the norm
Quote from: MartyFFC on October 10, 2021, 08:54:44 AM
Most countries in that part of the world are misogynistic, intolerant, deeply homophobic with appalling human rights records. You're likely to be imprisoned, flogged or chemically castrated for being gay in UAE; yet I don't hear anyone complaining about Man City's ownership. It's all about £££££££££. It will certainly be an interesting juxtaposition in Qatar, watching players taking the knee with their rainbow laces in a country where structural racism and homophobia are the norm
I take it you've never visited the UAE, much less lived there?
Ha, yeah I've been to the UAE many, many times. The Outside Inn is a cracking boozer if ever you're in Ajman - unbelievable seafood platter
Quote from: Twig on October 09, 2021, 07:47:37 PM
Quote from: Luka on October 09, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
Has anyone on here actually been to Saudi ?
Yes, I've visited KSA many times and worked for clients there. I had to as it was part of my job but always had misgivings and tried to minimise my involvement by focussing on clients elsewhere in the Middle East. Nonetheless KSA is such a financialn powerhouse that it was impossible to avoid.
As a matter of interest, why do you ask?
I believe you need to have visited the place to get a sense how different it is to other places in the Middle East.
I went on business a couple of times and found it a depressing, intimidating and soulless place.
After one particularly unpleasant experience watching a large group of migrant workers being processed at passport control I told my then employer and all employers since then that I would not return.
Quote from: cookieg on October 09, 2021, 10:20:46 PM
Quote from: Twig on October 09, 2021, 07:48:02 PM
Quote from: Mitrovic the warrior on October 08, 2021, 02:02:54 PM
Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right. Besides, I don't recall Russia or the UAE going to a foreign country and murdering a journalist and this being signed off right from the top of government.
Lol, this can't be serious right?
Russia doesn't need to go abroad to kill journalists, they do it at home.
And their Gothic architecture-loving
hitmen tourists are not averse to bumping off people they don't like if they stray from Mother Russia...or even completely innocent bystanders who they have never even heard of.
Recent article:
A Saudi Arabia-led takeover of Newcastle United has been completed with the Public Investment Fund (PIF) buying the Premier League club in a deal worth just over £300 million.
Newcastle have not been English champions since 1927 and have not won any domestic silverware since 1955, and fans believe this takeover will move them out of mediocrity. In seven games this Premier League season, Newcastle are yet to win a game and are 19th in the table, above only Norwich City.
The takeover ends an 18-month deadlock after an agreement was originally reached in April 2020. However, PIF, the world's largest sovereign wealth fund (state-owned investment), failed to pass the Premier League's owners' and directors' test at the time, creating an impasse which has been resolved following intensive talks in recent weeks.
Officially, the Premier League has privately indicated they are now satisfied the consortium has provided proof the Saudi state would not have control of Newcastle. The Premier League declined to comment to ESPN when contacted to explain how they had done this.
"The Premier League, Newcastle United Football Club and St James Holdings Limited have today settled the dispute over the takeover of the club by the consortium of PIF, PCP Capital Partners and RB Sports & Media," a Premier League statement said. "Following the completion of the Premier League's Owners' and Directors' Test, the club has been sold to the consortium with immediate effect.
"The legal disputes concerned which entities would own and/or have the ability to control the club following the takeover. All parties have agreed the settlement is necessary to end the long uncertainty for fans over the club's ownership.
"The Premier League has now received legally binding assurances that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will not control Newcastle United Football Club. All parties are pleased to have concluded this process which gives certainty and clarity to Newcastle United Football Club and their fans."
The deal is likely to meet strong public opposition in many quarters, however, given Saudi Arabia's human rights record and the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.
Khashoggi had been critical of the Saudi government and was killed in an act determined by the United States government to have been directly ordered by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, ruler of Saudi Arabia and chairman of the PIF.
Amnesty International called on the Premier League on Thursday to focus on human rights issues and "sportswashing."
"Instead of allowing those implicated in serious human rights violations to walk into English football simply because they have deep pockets, we've urged the Premier League to change their owners' and directors' test to address human rights issues," Amnesty's Sacha Deshmukh said.
"The phrase 'human rights' doesn't even appear in the owners' and directors' test despite English football supposedly adhering to FIFA standards.
"We've sent the Premier League a suggested new human rights-compliant test and we reiterate our call on them to overhaul their standards on this."
As part of the agreement with Newcastle, PIF will take an 80% stake, with private equity firm Reuben Brothers paying for a 10% stake and British businesswoman Amanda Staveley receiving 10% for her role in brokering the deal.
Staveley said of the deal: "This is a long-term investment. We are excited about the future prospects for Newcastle United. We intend to instill a united philosophy across the club, establish a clear purpose, and help provide leadership that will allow Newcastle United to go on to big achievements over the long term.
"Our ambition is aligned with the fans -- to create a consistently successful team that's regularly competing for major trophies and generates pride across the globe."
Sources have told ESPN that the catalyst for the sudden change was the end of a four-year dispute over Premier League broadcast rights in the Middle East by Qatari-owned broadcaster beIN Sports, which was banned in Saudi Arabia as the government blocked its signals.
Its content was then allegedly pirated by a Saudi-state run broadcaster beoutQ, which led to the beIN Corporation launching an international investment arbitration against Saudi Arabia seeking damages totalling more than $1 billion.
The World Trade Organization ruled last year that Saudi Arabia helped breach international piracy laws in relation to beoutQ but despite an acknowledgement to rectify the issue, beIN channels were still not shown fully in the region.
The arbitration process continued but sources have told ESPN that the Saudis have recognised their defence was likely to fail and have instead now sought a settlement with the beIN Corporation.
Now the piracy issue has been resolved, the Premier League is no longer in dispute with the Saudi state, although they maintain the key factor has been PIF proving it is a separate entity from the country's government rather than the end of the broadcast rights row.
Information from Reuters was used in this report.
I'm guessing that those of you with rights issues don't drive any form of transport that uses oil petrol or diesel. That would be like a vegan wearing leather shoes.
Quote from: Luka on October 10, 2021, 01:53:53 PM
Quote from: Twig on October 09, 2021, 07:47:37 PM
Quote from: Luka on October 09, 2021, 11:20:41 AM
Has anyone on here actually been to Saudi ?
Yes, I've visited KSA many times and worked for clients there. I had to as it was part of my job but always had misgivings and tried to minimise my involvement by focussing on clients elsewhere in the Middle East. Nonetheless KSA is such a financialn powerhouse that it was impossible to avoid.
As a matter of interest, why do you ask?
I believe you need to have visited the place to get a sense how different it is to other places in the Middle East.
I went on business a couple of times and found it a depressing, intimidating and soulless place.
After one particularly unpleasant experience watching a large group of migrant workers being processed at passport control I told my then employer and all employers since then that I would not return.
I agree with you Luka. I had a similar experience at Riyadh, some jumped up National Guard (or whatever) was laying into an immobile queue of migrant workers who had been waiting patiently to be processed for hours. None of the Middle East countries are perfect but Oman was always my favourite and KSA the place I liked least.
al Fayed supposedly was an arms dealer while in Egypt and the grocer bit was a façade of sorts.
Quote from: blingo on October 10, 2021, 08:24:02 PM
I'm guessing that those of you with rights issues don't drive any form of transport that uses oil petrol or diesel. That would be like a vegan wearing leather shoes.
Sorry but I don't see the relevance of this at all.
Quote from: Twig on October 10, 2021, 10:04:12 PM
Quote from: blingo on October 10, 2021, 08:24:02 PM
I'm guessing that those of you with rights issues don't drive any form of transport that uses oil petrol or diesel. That would be like a vegan wearing leather shoes.
Sorry but I don't see the relevance of this at all.
I'm struggling to see it too.
Quote from: cookieg on October 09, 2021, 10:20:46 PM
Quote from: Twig on October 09, 2021, 07:48:02 PM
Quote from: Mitrovic the warrior on October 08, 2021, 02:02:54 PM
Two (or three) wrongs don't make a right. Besides, I don't recall Russia or the UAE going to a foreign country and murdering a journalist and this being signed off right from the top of government.
Lol, this can't be serious right?
Russia doesn't need to go abroad to kill journalists, they do it at home.
I'm by no means defending Russia.
Quote from: Somerset Fulham on October 10, 2021, 10:26:07 PM
Quote from: Twig on October 10, 2021, 10:04:12 PM
Quote from: blingo on October 10, 2021, 08:24:02 PM
I'm guessing that those of you with rights issues don't drive any form of transport that uses oil petrol or diesel. That would be like a vegan wearing leather shoes.
Sorry but I don't see the relevance of this at all.
I'm struggling to see it too.
How much oil comes from Saudi? You cant profess to be anti everything they do or say you are giving up football because of the relationship with KSA and then without guilt use petrol/oil etc in your car without conscience. Wouldn't that mean you use their products to suit your life style, but conveniently forget their heinous rights issues?
Quote from: blingo on October 11, 2021, 08:59:45 AM
Quote from: Somerset Fulham on October 10, 2021, 10:26:07 PM
Quote from: Twig on October 10, 2021, 10:04:12 PM
Quote from: blingo on October 10, 2021, 08:24:02 PM
I'm guessing that those of you with rights issues don't drive any form of transport that uses oil petrol or diesel. That would be like a vegan wearing leather shoes.
Sorry but I don't see the relevance of this at all.
How much oil comes from Saudi? You cant profess to be anti everything they do or say you are giving up football because of the relationship with KSA and then without guilt use petrol/oil etc in your car without conscience. Wouldn't that mean you use their products to suit your life style, but conveniently forget their heinous rights issues?
This is so lateral.
I despise what Russia stands for but I don't do an analysis that my gas may come from there and boycott using gas as an energy product.
Quote from: Motspur Park on October 11, 2021, 09:14:34 AM
I despise what Russia stands for but I don't do an analysis that my gas may come from there and boycott using gas as an energy product.
You cannot possibly know where any energy you use in your home (gas or electric) comes from be it fossil fuel derived, hydroelectric, nuclear, renewable etc. That may excuse you from personal responsibility since you have no control over the source, but in terms of how you choose to condemn regimes surely it is better to have absolute personal rules that you will not break for any reason by refusing to be a member of the Three Wise Monkey Club when it comes to acceptable condemnation. There are degrees of unpleasantness in all human culture but it doesn't alter the simple fact they are all unpleasant acts. Morality is not something you can make bargains with or lay to one side when it suits. It is all or nothing unless you are a hypocrite.
I'm confused.
Are people suggesting that if you don't agree with a particular reigeme that they need to (in this instance) ditch their cars to prove it?
We will find out a lot about footballer players.
Human rights in Middle East not good.
But in recent wars executed by UK - namely Iraq and Afghanistan - anyone happy with what the UK did out there - killed many civilians by all accounts. The justification for either war still escapes me. UK needs to look at its human rights record before criticising others.
And Blingos point above is entirely reasonable.
If you don't like Saudi Arabia's human rights record then don't buy their oil. The revenues they get from the oil allows them to fund their culture and way of living and therefore supports the human rights abuses that you are all so angry about.
"But in recent wars executed by UK - namely Iraq and Afghanistan - anyone happy with what the UK did out there - killed many civilians by all accounts. The justification for either war still escapes me. UK needs to look at its human rights record before criticising others."
There were reasons for our involvement in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Both to prevent what were perceived as threats to us (wrongly perceived in the case of Iraq, rightly in the case of Afghanistan). It is perfectly reasonable to criticise the Blair government for its error in respect of Iraq (though in mitigation the late and largely unlamented Hussain boasted about having the capability to strike the west), and for various governments since for not getting us out of Afghanistan years ago when AQ were dealt with. But our government believed there was appropriate reason and our Parliament did not stop our involvement. War, provided it is conducted by the international codes, is not pertinent to human rights records.
The UK' has an exemplary record on human rights compared with much of the world. Freedom from arbitrary arrest, a mainly transparent judicial system, no "cruel or unusual" punishments, laws against most forms of discrimination, education from 5 to 18 a right (unless a young person over 15 prefers an apprenticeship), the list goes on and on. By comparison Russia, China and much of the middle east are decades behind us and most of the west.
So I'll presume Steve Bruce won't be stick around then ?
Personally I find the whole thing to be revolting.
Saudi Arabia will be hosting an annual F1 race soon, and have already held an Anthony Joshua fight. The only way things will improve over there is if they interact with the rest of the world, which they're starting to do. But all this selective moral outrage is perpetuated primarily by the so-called 'big 6', who are acting purely in self-interest. Yeah nobody agrees with a lot of the stuff that goes on over there but I think history has taught us by way of pointless wars, not to try and impose our values on them like some kind of world policeman. Personally I hope Newcastle do well and upset the status quo and wipe the smile off folk like Daniel Levy; up the toon
Russia provides about 5% of the UK's gas. The Russian stuff comes through our pipes from 7pm to about 8.30, so, naturally we turn off the c/h then. The only heat source we have during that time is old newspapers - the greasy ones recycled from the bins outside the local chippy have a high calorific value.
Although we are vegans we do wear leather sandals, but only leather tanned from roadkill and from crocodiles that have died of old age. Incoveniently crocodiles live to a ripe old age so we sometimes have to resort to the less greasy newspapers. Hopefully a source of incinerated pigskin is expected to become available soon.
Quote from: MartyFFC on October 11, 2021, 07:12:17 PM
Saudi Arabia will be hosting an annual F1 race soon, and have already held an Anthony Joshua fight. The only way things will improve over there is if they interact with the rest of the world, which they're starting to do. But all this selective moral outrage is perpetuated primarily by the so-called 'big 6', who are acting purely in self-interest. Yeah nobody agrees with a lot of the stuff that goes on over there but I think history has taught us by way of pointless wars, not to try and impose our values on them like some kind of world policeman. Personally I hope Newcastle do well and upset the status quo and wipe the smile off folk like Daniel Levy; up the toon
Strange how you pick out a Jewish chairman
What if the Taliban bought control of Fulham FC. What would be different?
Quote from: MrCorn on October 11, 2021, 08:18:29 PM
What if the Taliban bought control of Fulham FC. What would be different?
Well our Government promised to protect all those that helped us like interpreters and guides. Then we ran away and left most of them behind to be slaughtered by the Taliban. I guess what is the difference allowing English Companies and owners to take over Football clubs. I am not sure how deep and far we want to take this nonsense.
The time to get excited and stop who we see as not fit is long before they start taking over football clubs. But when money is involved we sort of object but let them get away with killing and cutting up people and attacking Women. Then get excited when they look at our football clubs. It's all nonsense and moral outrage far too late.
Quote from: blingo on October 11, 2021, 08:06:51 PM
Quote from: MartyFFC on October 11, 2021, 07:12:17 PM
Saudi Arabia will be hosting an annual F1 race soon, and have already held an Anthony Joshua fight. The only way things will improve over there is if they interact with the rest of the world, which they're starting to do. But all this selective moral outrage is perpetuated primarily by the so-called 'big 6', who are acting purely in self-interest. Yeah nobody agrees with a lot of the stuff that goes on over there but I think history has taught us by way of pointless wars, not to try and impose our values on them like some kind of world policeman. Personally I hope Newcastle do well and upset the status quo and wipe the smile off folk like Daniel Levy; up the toon
Strange how you pick out a Jewish chairman
Is he? Picked him out as he's the most obnoxious
Quote from: MartyFFC on October 11, 2021, 08:45:00 PM
Quote from: blingo on October 11, 2021, 08:06:51 PM
Quote from: MartyFFC on October 11, 2021, 07:12:17 PM
Saudi Arabia will be hosting an annual F1 race soon, and have already held an Anthony Joshua fight. The only way things will improve over there is if they interact with the rest of the world, which they're starting to do. But all this selective moral outrage is perpetuated primarily by the so-called 'big 6', who are acting purely in self-interest. Yeah nobody agrees with a lot of the stuff that goes on over there but I think history has taught us by way of pointless wars, not to try and impose our values on them like some kind of world policeman. Personally I hope Newcastle do well and upset the status quo and wipe the smile off folk like Daniel Levy; up the toon
Strange how you pick out a Jewish chairman
Is he? Picked him out as he's the most obnoxious
I'm guessing your being sarcastic
Tom Werner, the Glazers, and Abramovich are all Jewish too, so not entirely sure what your point is.
Yeah right
Would Rashford sign for Newcastle? Principled chap he is, I think not. I don't think they will dominate football, if at all.
They'll be Top 6 Mr Rebel. Money talks and b/s walks.
As for war.....It never shows who's right, just who's left.
Quote from: blingo on October 12, 2021, 09:00:38 AM
They'll be Top 6 Mr Rebel. Money talks and b/s walks.
As for war.....It never shows who's right, just who's left.
Confucius say 'When blingo talks, the world wakes up and smiles'.
I don't want to appear too cynical. But it is very easy if you have tens of millions of pounds coming in and appear principled. It helps with the sponsorships and it helps that you don't have to sacrifice too much for any cause and appear right on and be popular. It is a win win. Especially when you can get publicity for anybody who is nasty to you on Twitter.
Quote from: Lighthouse on October 12, 2021, 10:29:11 AM
I don't want to appear too cynical. But it is very easy if you have tens of millions of pounds coming in and appear principled. It helps with the sponsorships and it helps that you don't have to sacrifice too much for any cause and appear right on and be popular. It is a win win. Especially when you can get publicity for anybody who is nasty to you on Twitter.
I honestly don't think that is the case. We will see who they will sign.
George Orwell was mightily prescient:
"War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength."
...or, if you dislike the Old Etonian viewpoint, how about Jello Biafra's:
"You're a Star-Belly Sneetch, you suck like a leech
You want everyone to act like you
Kiss ass while you bitch, so you can get rich
But your boss gets richer off you
Well, you'll work harder with a gun in your back
For a bowl of rice a day..."
This might interest some - Guardian cartoonist David Squires's view-
https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2021/oct/12/david-squires-on-newcastle-united-saudi-takeover
If there's a bone saw in the medicine kit, run like hell.
Wouldn't it be great if the first thing they do is offer Steve Bruce a brand new 10-year contract
The guy at HTC Sevens is always good for such stories, he meanders quite a bit for the first few minutes of his videos, but very in-depth and I recommend looking at his other videos too...
https://youtu.be/YDzqc3mUQgs
But yeah can usually skip the first 2-3 minutes
Steve who??? They will appoint a top class manager and then rebuild. It really is that simple. But why begrudge them. I'd love to see that sort of investment at FFC.
Quote from: RaySmith on October 12, 2021, 01:12:45 PM
This might interest some - Guardian cartoonist David Squires's view-
https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2021/oct/12/david-squires-on-newcastle-united-saudi-takeover
Interesting & humourous cartoon, RaySmith. :plus one:
Quote from: blingo on October 12, 2021, 09:16:24 PM
Steve who??? They will appoint a top class manager and then rebuild. It really is that simple. But why begrudge them. I'd love to see that sort of investment at FFC.
Good point, Blingo.
Whoever the new manager is, I'm guessing if results aren't going too well; he'll be politely declining any invitation to attend a function at the Saudi Embassy
It's awful for everyone related / associated with the late Mr. Khashoggi and the wider world. Newcastle will be 'stained' for ever.
Quote from: rebel on October 14, 2021, 08:53:11 AM
It's awful for everyone related / associated with the late Mr. Khashoggi and the wider world. Newcastle will be 'stained' for ever.
Which Khashoggi Mr Rebel, the one they topped or the arms dealer associated with MAF ???????
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on October 07, 2021, 06:36:30 PM
Quote from: Jamie88 on October 07, 2021, 06:32:29 PM
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on October 07, 2021, 06:13:32 PM
I wouldn't bet on many of the female side of the human race going to watch them, just a ton of fat beer bellies.
Also as a one Club City they should have a lot of fans and they should have achieved much more on the field of play.
The last time rhey opened up Newcastles Trophy Cabinet Adam & Eve fell out.
Is it not a bit rich for any one of us to slate another clubs trophy cabinet?!
I did not know we even had a Trophy Cabinet, and no it is not at all rich. So I shall say it again, the last time they opened up Newcastles Trophy Cabinet a Witchfinder General fell out.
Yeah, we got it 'almost new' from Arsenal back in the MaF days! :005:
Quote from: Jamie88 on October 07, 2021, 06:32:29 PM
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on October 07, 2021, 06:13:32 PM
I wouldn't bet on many of the female side of the human race going to watch them, just a ton of fat beer bellies.
Also as a one Club City they should have a lot of fans and they should have achieved much more on the field of play.
The last time rhey opened up Newcastles Trophy Cabinet Adam & Eve fell out.
Is it not a bit rich for any one of us to slate another clubs trophy cabinet?!
0001.jpeg 0001.jpeg 0001.jpeg
