Wullie

I think many people feel that Independent journalists are a bit hypocritical, when a Saudi investor part owns the company. I thought that journalists' work not being dictated by the owners of their outlets would be seen as a good thing but you live and learn. He could try and get a job at another newspaper, since hes so principled. And if he does that, how does it change the situation at NUFC or whether it's right or wrong for these guys to own the club? It doesn't at all, it's just a lazy cheap point scoring exercise to avoid discussing the actual issue. Play the ball, not the man. I'm talking about him being a hypocrite and why I find it annoying and I've made my point. It doesnt change a thing on the ownership issue. But it makes him a hypocrite and in the process annoys me. Why do you change the subject? I can, on the one hand, see someones point of view but on the other see them as a hypocrite because of it. Do you want to talk about the morality of Saudi ownership or hypocrisy? I've put aside the ownership issue and said it's fair enough that people feel uncomfortable but I'm not having someone telling me what I should think or do when they dont themselves take a stand. I take Neesys point that the guy might have tried to get a job at a newspaper, and fair play if he did. I doubt it. It's not hypocrisy though. His position, as I understand it, is: Newcastle fans are going to benefiting from Saudi money, and so should speak out against their human rights abuses while doing so (at the match etc). That's exactly what he's doing. He's taking a wage from a newspaper part owned by Saudi money, and speaking out against their human rights abuses while doing so. He's practising what he preaches. It's literally the opposite of hypocrisy. I dont agree. Hes working for (and by proxy, supporting) the very people who he says we should snub. I've never doubted his knowledge on the subject fwiw. I also think we all play apart in the horrid game. Every time I get petrol, I'm probably supporting them in some way. It's just this time, i might get some glimmer of joy out of my football club. I know its selfish but that's just how I feel. He doesn't say they should be 'snubbed' though, in fact the main thing he advocated that people had a problem with was a protest at the games themselves which is exactly in keeping with his circumstances. I think that's unrealistic, there's just no history of political protest in this country at football, but it's certainly not without precedent. Bayern Munich supporters at the moment are being extremely vocal on the club's relationship with Qatar.

I think many people feel that Independent journalists are a bit hypocritical, when a Saudi investor part owns the company. I thought that journalists' work not being dictated by the owners of their outlets would be seen as a good thing but you live and learn. He could try and get a job at another newspaper, since hes so principled. And if he does that, how does it change the situation at NUFC or whether it's right or wrong for these guys to own the club? It doesn't at all, it's just a lazy cheap point scoring exercise to avoid discussing the actual issue. Play the ball, not the man. I'm talking about him being a hypocrite and why I find it annoying and I've made my point. It doesnt change a thing on the ownership issue. But it makes him a hypocrite and in the process annoys me. Why do you change the subject? I can, on the one hand, see someones point of view but on the other see them as a hypocrite because of it. Do you want to talk about the morality of Saudi ownership or hypocrisy? I've put aside the ownership issue and said it's fair enough that people feel uncomfortable but I'm not having someone telling me what I should think or do when they dont themselves take a stand. I take Neesys point that the guy might have tried to get a job at a newspaper, and fair play if he did. I doubt it. It's not hypocrisy though. His position, as I understand it, is: Newcastle fans are going to benefiting from Saudi money, and so should speak out against their human rights abuses while doing so (at the match etc). That's exactly what he's doing. He's taking a wage from a newspaper part owned by Saudi money, and speaking out against their human rights abuses while doing so. He's practising what he preaches. It's literally the opposite of hypocrisy.

Do the Reuben Brothers own part of Pilgrim St or have I made that up?

I think many people feel that Independent journalists are a bit hypocritical, when a Saudi investor part owns the company. I thought that journalists' work not being dictated by the owners of their outlets would be seen as a good thing but you live and learn. He could try and get a job at another newspaper, since hes so principled. And if he does that, how does it change the situation at NUFC or whether it's right or wrong for these guys to own the club? It doesn't at all, it's just a lazy cheap point scoring exercise to avoid discussing the actual issue. Play the ball, not the man.

I think many people feel that Independent journalists are a bit hypocritical, when a Saudi investor part owns the company. I thought that journalists' work not being dictated by the owners of their outlets would be seen as a good thing but you live and learn.

I'd have been more than happy with Staveley and the Reubens, as I think anybody would. As mentioned though if they come in with all the right intentions for the club and the city as a whole, and actually manage to transform us into a global force then I think most people will be able to separate the two. That's how football is. I really hope they keep it at arm's length, unlike Man City. Rather not see MBS sitting in the director's box with Wraith gurning 3 seats away and offering to run a Twitter account for him.

There's a line in The Times today that Chris Mort was offered, and has declined, Charnley's job.

The guys from the Independent and the Guardian are getting by far the most grief.

"The British government deal with them as allies and the footballing authorities aren't stopping the takeover" is a perfectly respectable argument to make and one I can't really quibble with. Shit about Sheffield United and Wolves and how everyone hates us and anyway all the journos really support Man United is just tedious cobblers.

I think the media is more biased against human rights abuses than they are a football team. Just a hunch.

He's not winding me up, it's simply an example of someone who has a high profile platform to spout a load of rubbish when it comes to Newcastle. The fact that the Premier League already has Saudi owners who were allowed in without any hint of a fuss is another example. Do you know this for a fact or is it not just that the issue's now come into your world so you're more aware of it? He's not winding me up, it's simply an example of someone who has a high profile platform to spout a load of rubbish when it comes to Newcastle. The fact that the Premier League already has Saudi owners who were allowed in without any hint of a fuss is another example. once again to make it clear private saudi owner (who yes is a member of the royal family but theres a lot of them) is not the state of saudi arabia which whats buying nufc through their public investment fund thats the difference and why theres not a fuss about Sheffield Uniteds owner. Does it matter? They're still from Saudi Arabia, the place with the rotten human rights records, and the place that is pirating games from beIN Sport. The same outrage should apply, but it didn't. I don't recall seeing Sheff Utd's takeover dominating the football headlines and loads of people having their say on it, or trying everything they could to block the deal. If that did happen to the level we're getting rocks thrown at us then I'll gladly hold my hands up and say I'm wrong, but again I don't recall that happening. Does it matter? Yes it's the entire point. Unless you think the British Government currently owns and is responsible for NUFC. The paper merchant from Saudi Arabia is not directing the war in Yemen, or decapitating journalists. The state is.

He's not winding me up, it's simply an example of someone who has a high profile platform to spout a load of rubbish when it comes to Newcastle. The fact that the Premier League already has Saudi owners who were allowed in without any hint of a fuss is another example. What do you not grasp about the difference between a private individual and a state? Do you think Mike Ashley owning NUFC is exactly the same as if we were owned by HM Treasury?

Aye cos that would have been in the Chronicle. You have absolutely no idea whether they did or they didn't.

Yeah I assumed the point was about respected journalists who've been writing about these issues for years rather than idiot TV presenters. Don't understand why you'd even let someone like Keys, a bloke who was too much of a moron for Sky Sports (!), wind you up, like who cares?

Selective in what way?

If they promise to dismember Richard Keys with a bonesaw I'm on board.

I think I'd be hoping for it to fall through if I thought there'd be another group along in six months and that Ashley was a willing seller under normal circumstances. But this might be our only shot. For all my misgivings, I'd much rather it goes through than not and worry about the rest later. If it turns out that I feel I can't support the club under the new ownership, well that's where I am now anyway and have been for years.

I just assumed she'd wait until it was done.

Has anyone asked Lee Clarke?

I agree with Chri's.

Be interesting to see what she does say actually, she's raised Saudi atrocities in Parliament before. I suspect she'll turn out to be a closet mackem and hate Alan Shearer.

Shock horror as opinion writers respond more to actual happenings than unsubstantiated rumour. I don't know what it is you want that is more scathing than that article I just posted - "to see the club in which they have made a huge emotional investment used as a vehicle for self-promotion by the most brutally repressive regime on Earth is beyond revolting... No-one with a conscience could cheerfully support the club were the Saudis to take up residence in the Old Trafford board room." That's much further than I would go and it's still not enough proof that this isn't a media storm that's all about Newcastle United, instead of all about Saudi Arabia. "He only wrote 1 article instead of 2! Must be a Manc!" I actually think some people are attempting to salve their own unease by doing this. Convince yourself that it's because everyone hates Newcastle and I suspect it's much easier to buy into quickly.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/11/04/manchester-united-fans-may-want-rid-club-glazers-sportswashing/