Raconteur

That's the only one for me, but as I posted earlier I don't see how they can distance themselves from all the other politcal angles but use that one Either we're being bought by the embodiment of a nation state with all the political baggage that brings (which the PL appear to have already discounted in their reply to Amnesty), or we're being bought by an investment fund which is separate from the state and can't be deemed to have any influence on other Saudi owners. Can't have it both ways. I can see why this is taking some time, though aye MBS being on the board of PiF is surely an issue you'd think, if he wasn't then you've no direct/indirect link but seeing as he is there's surely a strong argument to tie the fund to the state and he's already proven he can influence any saudi when he locked them all in a hotel and stole loads of their shit complicated indeed Absolutely, and I agree that the SU argument is the most likely one to sink this. The PL appear to have already said that they regard PIF as an investment fund rather than an extension of the state in their reply to Amnesty, though. If their shoulder-shrugging response (which was basically, "pffft, it's a company in Saudi Arabia") was enough for them to dismiss the human rights arguments and dodgy TV allegations, I don't see how they can do anything other than treat the potential of undue influence the same way. All the arguments come down to "he's in charge of the country and he's on the board" and ultimately, either they're dealing with MBS or they're not: he surely can't be used as a material part of the argument in some circumstances but not in others? The difference is that the PL can wash their hands of what's happening in the Middle East, but fuck with the integrity of their competition and it's a different story. And I know it's the modern day equivalent to Godin's Law, but imagine we go into the final day needing a win against Sheffield United to win the league. It's not unrealistic to suggest an invitation to the embassy might be extended if the result didn't turn out the right way in that situation.

This is my thoughts too - and I'm a trifle concerned that it's the Sheffield United/Saudi Arabia thing. Don't the rules on ownership of two clubs refer to "influence" over more than one club? I genuinely can't decide if a legitimate case could be made that NUFC would be in a position to influence SUFC. Not because of the closeness of the "cousin" relationship, more that every Saudi can be influenced by MBS?

Was thinking exactly this when I was watching Jamie Redknapp carrying on about the “lack of respect” being shown to Bruce. Sure Jamie, bet you’d feel the same if Bruce was offered the Liverpool job

Yes to both parts of this

With VAR, Dyer and Lua-Lua’s goals are both ruled out and we lose 1-2. Don’t remember ever being this lucky other than when Pardew was in charge...

To what end though? It's dependant on the market, but I don't think City Football Group or Manchester City have felt a significant benefit other than having eyes on the ground in these places. The priority needs to be the club's infrastructure locally. Speaking for Melbourne City, between the loan fee to Huddersfield and the transfer fee to Brighton for Aaron Mooy, the City Group made more than the entire value of Melbourne City FC. Australia's example is ridiculously small time, but still...

It's is a lunatic notion clung to by chicken-littles...

Of all the fantasy type signings we've been "linked" with , I think I like him best. Certainly more than Bale or Cavani

I think that's a bit ridiculous and presumably based on nowt other than the fact he uses Instagram. His account is basically all football stuf n'all. You have to be FUCKING AMAZING at football to play in the Premier League / at the World Cup. It's all relative I know but the point is I don't think you get there by dossing it, even those who aren't great by PL standards. Fair comment. I didn't want to come across as a bit Sounessy I just think the lad has got his priorities a bit mixed up. When he's in the news its 50/50 between stuff he's done on the park or off it. He's obviously got talent but I think in 5 years time he'll be a cautionary tale. 'You don't want to end up like Jesse Lingard' type of thing. He's got a maximum of 6 seasons left before he's done, wonder what his legacy will be. I'm thinking more Nicky Butt than Phil Neville - completely impossible to believe he was once part of a great team (if Man U were ever great with Lindgard in the team)

Doesn't Yedlin want to go back home? You'd think someone in Sweden would take Krafth, and we are (probably) in a position where we can take a hit on the fee (which was what, 4m?)

This is the end of it

So there is not even a 0.001% chance that it could fall through? OK then. This is exceedingly tedious. That's some fucking English understatement right there...

"pUtAtIvE" iSn'T pRoOf etc

I have this scar-like memory of some mackem getting this as a tattoo (with Di Canio having a weirdly huge cock)

Seems very like he is one of the people whom unofficial feelers have been put out - and now he's even more up his own arse...

Let's hope we don't follow them swapping stripes for checks...

Maybe, but would take Pochettino even longer. Rafa Daylight Allegri Someone else Poch is a good manager, potentially a great one, but I think it's fair to say Rafa and Allegri already are

I do like Lejeune, but he's had some significant injury issues and is about to turn 29. If we're going for a big upgrade, he's likely to be on the chopping block...

I have to say I'm with HTT 100% on Rafa over Allegri - him coming back would be like putting on a glove, while Allegri is going to spend a long time implementing his systems. It would save 6-12 months at least on moving the club upwards, the difference between aiming for the CL in two seasons or three (subject to a bonanza takeover, of course)

Does Allegri speak English - and is that a factor?

That's how I'm expecting confirmation - trying to log on here without success before trying the Beeb

zola wasn't on a free mind, parma sold hima and tino in fairly quick succession I had an outraged reply prepared but made a quick check on Wiki - my apologies, sir. You are correct. Been labouring under that misapprehension for a long time, so you’ve done me a favour

I disagree. They were not happy with Murray when he owned them and had them mid table in the Premier League, they went down and he sold to Quinn via administration. They started having a go at Quinn when his ambition was to stabilise for a while. He sold to Short and they were not happy with him just being happy to stay in the Premier League before they went down. As soon as they lost the Checkatrade trophy and the play off final they turned on Donald. If Ashley (or anyone else) got them into the Championship they won’t be happy if they don’t do a Sheffield United or Wolves like quick bounce into the Premier League. If they did that then they wouldn’t be happy being in a relegation battle. You also have to look at that RTG thread and look at how many fans are now turning around and saying actually they wouldn’t want him at Sunderland. This unhappiness would be a quicker process if we are successful or competing towards the top of the Premier League. Unless Sunderland got promoted this season then Ashley isn’t buying them. They are too far away from potentially reaching the Premier League. There is plenty of their fans and ours saying he would do this to spite our fans. I don’t think he would. He honestly doesn’t care that much. If our takeover goes through, then buying Sunderland wouldn’t spite us because he won’t be able to put enough money into them to make them compete at the same level as us to generate a situation where it would spite us, even then he knows that the vast majority of our fans would not be spited by him owning them, but joyed. Him buying Sunderland only makes sense if they are in the Championship with the ability to be promoted to the riches of the Premier League. If they were in the Championship, then with the size of the stadium they have, and the quality of the training ground and academy they have, they would likely be the best option for anyone wanting to buy a Championship team with the target of getting promoted to the Premier League. Only then does it make sense for Ashley buying them. Yup, can’t see Ashley owning the mackems being anything other than a complete disaster - especially if we are successful. It would take a season before they’re calling him “Agent Mike” (while we wet ourselves at that notion)

Considering George HW Bush invaded Iraq at the behest of SA in 1991... no, not recently. Nowadays, they do their warmongering for themselves. (Sorry, one for the chat thread, but the question was asked)

Inflated sponsorship deals are specifically prohibited - but enforcement of that has to be a nightmare. Didn't City get into trouble with their airline sponsorship? They aren’t. They can’t be inflated by a company which has links with the owners. Everything else is hard to prove. If City, PSG, and Spurs in recent years can gain sponsorship deals 1000’s time higher than any previous deals, it would be hard to argue that other clubs can’t achieve the sale. Eh? First Google search tells me that Man City's Etihad sponsorship was one of the reasons they got banned from the Champions League? https://slate.com/culture/2020/02/manchester-city-banned-champions-league-uefa-sponsorship-scandal.html Unless it wasn't obvious I was referring to Saudi/PIF/Armamco sponsorship?