Chris_R

That was my immediate thought but then wondered if sticking Dubs or Given in for the likes of the 4-3 Liverpool game might make more sense? Something a bit more open, they can affect it more by holding them to a couple less goals, rather than the fine margin of the Man U game? I was 6 at the time though so I could be completely wrong. Can you use all three gems in one match? If we win the Man U game its a 6 point swing, beating Liverpool is only 3. I also think Given or Dubs 100% save Cantona's shot and they had nothing else all game You can't factor that in because with different teams, different play would have ensued and Cantona wouldn't have had that same shot.

Except that the victims of this piracy are now us fans as the takeover is stalled! Whilst you may have a general point about piracy which I accept, the victims of my personal piracy certainly are NOT us fans. I've never used BeOUTQ, nor have the overwhelming majority of us, nor have I ever paid for any pirated content. The avenues I use are totally free and therefore unlikely to result in the people in question attempting to take over a football club. Anyway, I've avoided paying for Sky for 25+ years, saving* probably 12k+ in that time. In no version of reality is getting this takeover through worth that amount of money to me, so I still say I've chosen wisely. * I say saving, I'd never have paid it anyway so I'd contest that this is not lost revenue to the PL because the alternative to piracy for me isn't to buy Sky, it's to just not watch the games.

Yeah Sky is normally £48/month for football, so that's what, £576 a year for a handful of Newcastle games. Fuck that. I guess if you place actual value on watching Watford vs Aston Villa or whoever too then fair enough it makes it a better deal, but I just watch us. I have Netflix for normal TV and don't need anything more there either, so I place no value on their "normal" channels either. I'd just be paying £48/month for whatever Newcastle games they show. No thanks. And whilst I do feel a twinge of remorse at pirating "watchable" Newcastle games, I feel absolutely none at streaming them when they're not even on in the UK. That is a victimless crime to me.

This for me. I'd take Beardsley, Asprilla and Srnicek out. I loved Pav, but he was erratic. Same for Tino. And Beardsley was 35 by this point and very much on the wane. Replace them with ASM, peak Shearer, and peak Given, and I think you've got a great chance of a different outcome. There's also an argument for keeping Srnicek in and swapping out one of Howey or Albert (Probably Howey) for a non-broken Woodgate. Win this game and we win the league, simple as that.

Fair enough, but I didn't "go off on one to try and prove it's negative". You literally quoted my first words, "not necessarily". I didn't try to prove anything, I just offered an alternative thought on the tweet. Anyway, whatever. I need a beer.

I never said people shouldn't have hope. I simply expressed an alternative view, that maybe something else was happening. This is a discussion forum, right?

Dare we hope they have moved on from the issue of piracy Not necessarily. Christ give it a rest man. 'Dare we hope?' NO!! BRING IN THE NEGATIVITY HOSE!! Apologies for making relevant, valid points on a football forum in the appropriate thread related to the takeover. I didn't realise we all just had to blindly suck each other off and say how it'll definitely go through with no hiccups and there's nothing preventing it happening. After all, it's only been 13 weeks so clearly nothing's up and nothing I say could possibly be correct anyway. Thanks for putting me right.

Dare we hope they have moved on from the issue of piracy Not necessarily. If piracy is still an issue, maybe that's why they're discussing the makeup of the ownership. Maybe certain people or investors are to be sidelined to get this through. Otherwise the makeup of the ownership is sod-all to do with the PL. That's something they've otherwise been told, not invited to discuss.

"coming days". Fuck my life. All we've done for 13 years is fucking wait. Wait for the next transfer window. Wait to see if Ashley will change Wait to see if next year will be better Wait for the next takeover rumour Wait for months for this one to play out Wait endlessly as it's "imminent" or "next week" Now we've got to wait "a few more days". 13 years of having my football-supporting life on fucking hold. Sorry, I think I've just snapped.

Imagine being so obsessed with your rivals that despite facing administration and just finishing in your lowest ever league position in the 3rd tier of football, all you can think to get riled about is that you think your rivals over-rate their former CL-winning manager. What a weird planet they live on.

I suspect you're right, but the league isn't over, because the playoffs haven't finished. I wasn't absolutely sure where the line was.

If they do it now, does the season count as finished? Ie I think if it does, the points go on next season's tally. If not, it goes on this season. There's a cutoff, anyway, be interesting to see which side they're on if they do file for administration.

A politician with a conflict of interests? Whatever next?!

He's the chairman of PIF. Of course he falls under the remit of the directors' test, it's ludicrous to suggest otherwise. It's literally in the PL's guidance handbook. Section A1.56: https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2020/06/23/d26d1955-3ffe-4e62-a861-9a4ecf405e0e/2019-20-PL-Handbook-230620.pdf I mean, you can't say with a straight face that MBS isn't in that category, especially the bolded bit.

Optimists.

I suspect they already have, and this is the appeal stage. The PL have told them what to do to pass (sort out piracy in Saudi Arabia), and we're seeing evidence of that happening. Hopefully they do enough. Even if they aren't in any appeal stage, what they're doing now in Saudi is clearly at the behest of the Premier League with the idea that it'll help push this through.

Again, I hope you're all right. I hope this goes through as much as anyone. But we're into week 13 now and it hasn't, that's got to tell you something about how completely unable to disqualify or stop PIF the PL are.

MBS is the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, and the chairman of PIF. In his role as Crown Prince, he's believed complicit in piracy. In his role as chairman of PIF, he's a person likely to be able to influence the direction of the club and therefore counts as a director, named or not, under the terms of the O&Ds' test. I went through this about 2 months ago and was shouted down, yet here we are. It seems the PL are giving the Saudis a window of opportunity to get their house in order to pass the test. That seems more than fair to me, hence the delays, because there wasn't a hope in hell of this passing in its original form. I said that at the time and with the events of the last few weeks I most certainly stand by it now. Everyone screaming how "unfair" it is that it's taking so long, or they're not being kept informed about the workings of confidential deals need to give their heads a shake. We have no right to be kept informed, indeed it would be grossly unprofessional if we WERE kept informed, and the only alternative to a long, drawn-out process would be the deal collapsing. Which of course it still might. I agree that fairness doesn't come into it, my response was to your assertion that the current position would be rejection. There does not appear to be anything in the WTO report that is likely to equate to an actual offence by the Saudi State or MbS. As far as I can see the cards appear to be stacked very much in PIF's favour because the PL do not seem to have an actual offence to hang disqualification of a director on and, by their rules, should have issued their decision within five working days. My view is that at moment the PL are probably bluffing, knowing that they have a weak hand, trying to get whatever concessions they can, and for now PIF are happy enough to play along. Well I hope you're right, of course. But I don't see that. The French court case recently ruled that Arabsat, whose main shareholder is Saudi Arabia, were distributing BeOUTQ. https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2019/06/14/arabsat-is-distributing-beoutq-french-court-rules/ The WTO report said that the Saudis didn't do enough to prevent piracy. Apparently the PL tried what, 7, 9 times to contact the Saudis? And were just rebuffed every time. Legal recourse has clearly and deliberately been denied to rights holders by the Saudis. Personally, I don't know where the line is for "reasonable belief" in an offence because I'm not that up on all the relevant international legislation. But for anyone to say with certainty that there's not enough evidence that we couldn't possibly be over that line seems incredibly optimistic, as the only people who could potentially say for certain are employed in such incredibly niche positions that I doubt they're posting on here, and even if they were, they'd have to do months worth of reading and have access to information likely not in the public domain to make an accurate judgement. We have to trust that the PL are looking at this correctly, and that the relevant lawyers interpret it correctly. And that we get the result we want. But I go back to my initial point - People screaming that it's taking too long or they deserve to be informed or that they PL are being unprofessional just come across as whiny children who haven't got their sweets yet. I'm as frustrated as anyone, but I'm fully aware that the grown-ups are still doing their shopping and the sweets only come at the end. Hopefully we get sweets, but screaming for them and having a tantrum in the middle of aisle 8 seldom works. Is a government putting in place an environment that denied legal recourse tantamount to a specific offence by the government? I think probably not. Arabsat is owned by 21 states, including the UAE (and Qatar), if MbS fails the test on the basis that the Saudi state owns part of Arabsat so would Sheik Mansour because of the UAE's ownership interest. The Saudis plus Kuwait, their closest regional allies, have a controlling stake of 51%. Yes, the Qataris own 9.8% and the UAE 4.7% but that's very different to having a controlling stake in the company and what it does. And of course other countries have stakes too but 12 of them have less than 2% each. I own more than that in shares of an Australian mining company but I'm fucked if I'll be held accountable for their actions if they start doing dodgy shit. I've never even been to Australia or spoken to anyone at the company, I'm just in it for the ride and hopefully some £s at the end. Ultimately though, my point isn't that they HAVE committed an act that is in the "reasonable opinion" of the PL likely to disqualify them. My point is that nobody (at least none of us) can be sure that they have not. The very fact that the actual lawyers in this with the evidence in front of them still haven't signed it off is surely proof of that? I had to let people have their "Oh, it'll be fine" moment what, 6 weeks ago, but now it looks rather like I had a point then because look where we are now - NOT signed off as we rampage into week 13 of a 4-week process. For people to still be talking in such absolutes despite this, that the Saudis have DEFINITELY NOT done anything that could render them liable for disqualification and the PL cannot stop this going through, is frankly bonkers because it seems the PL's lawyers who are actually working on the case aren't as sure as all you google experts.

Acceptable for supporters but what about the club and the people involved who work there though? We're stuck in limbo and this is the main reason why the PL needs to come to a decision. Doesn't matter, quite frankly. They will come to a decision. Demanding they hurry it is ridiculous and if anything counter-productive. Assuming they're taking their time to give it every chance to go through, which seems like the case here, can't people see the problem with asking them NOT to take their time? How is it counter productive?, the only decision is based on the D&O text anything else has got nothing to do with any decision Because you're getting the backs up of people who are human beings with real emotions and feelings. If this is on a knife edge, which it looks like, then however much we might want to *think* they'll just look at the facts, do you really think it's worth the risk? We should ditch the petition, it's childish and petulant.

Acceptable for supporters but what about the club and the people involved who work there though? We're stuck in limbo and this is the main reason why the PL needs to come to a decision. Doesn't matter, quite frankly. They will come to a decision. Demanding they hurry it is ridiculous and if anything counter-productive. Assuming they're taking their time to give it every chance to go through, which seems like the case here, can't people see the problem with asking them NOT to take their time?

Who said the fans don't influence the process? The fans have no control. The fans have no right to be kept informed. But of course they can influence it. Just by doing this, it'll not be for the better.

I most certainly did NOT say the PL would not take notice of us throwing tantrums. I was saying it would have no positive effect for us. Like the child screaming for sweets, you're just increasing your chances of going home with nothing. Fucking change petitions. Fucking hell. We're turning into the mackems. The mackems have sat from the sidelines while their club slides towards administration. Their inaction helped cause this. Happy to boo from the stands and leave after 20mins, but they do fuck all else but moan about it on rtg and in the pub. Ashley has done a very good job on a number of fans who have ended up like them. Liverpool on the other hands helped take their owners to high court and battled for years, theyve finally got their reward. This. I’m still utterly ashamed at those fans who shouted at the stadium boycotters while eating their prawn sandwiches Oh, I'm a million percent behind a stadium boycott. But not a change petition to the PL to let the takeover go through, or whatever it says. It just a tantrum. Fucking stop. They're making a decision, this is just embarrassing and not likely to do anything other than alienate us to them.

I most certainly did NOT say the PL would not take notice of us throwing tantrums. I was saying it would have no positive effect for us. Like the child screaming for sweets, you're just increasing your chances of going home with nothing. Fucking change petitions. Fucking hell. We're turning into the mackems.

MBS is the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, and the chairman of PIF. In his role as Crown Prince, he's believed complicit in piracy. In his role as chairman of PIF, he's a person likely to be able to influence the direction of the club and therefore counts as a director, named or not, under the terms of the O&Ds' test. I went through this about 2 months ago and was shouted down, yet here we are. It seems the PL are giving the Saudis a window of opportunity to get their house in order to pass the test. That seems more than fair to me, hence the delays, because there wasn't a hope in hell of this passing in its original form. I said that at the time and with the events of the last few weeks I most certainly stand by it now. Everyone screaming how "unfair" it is that it's taking so long, or they're not being kept informed about the workings of confidential deals need to give their heads a shake. We have no right to be kept informed, indeed it would be grossly unprofessional if we WERE kept informed, and the only alternative to a long, drawn-out process would be the deal collapsing. Which of course it still might. I agree that fairness doesn't come into it, my response was to your assertion that the current position would be rejection. There does not appear to be anything in the WTO report that is likely to equate to an actual offence by the Saudi State or MbS. As far as I can see the cards appear to be stacked very much in PIF's favour because the PL do not seem to have an actual offence to hang disqualification of a director on and, by their rules, should have issued their decision within five working days. My view is that at moment the PL are probably bluffing, knowing that they have a weak hand, trying to get whatever concessions they can, and for now PIF are happy enough to play along. Well I hope you're right, of course. But I don't see that. The French court case recently ruled that Arabsat, whose main shareholder is Saudi Arabia, were distributing BeOUTQ. https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2019/06/14/arabsat-is-distributing-beoutq-french-court-rules/ The WTO report said that the Saudis didn't do enough to prevent piracy. Apparently the PL tried what, 7, 9 times to contact the Saudis? And were just rebuffed every time. Legal recourse has clearly and deliberately been denied to rights holders by the Saudis. Personally, I don't know where the line is for "reasonable belief" in an offence because I'm not that up on all the relevant international legislation. But for anyone to say with certainty that there's not enough evidence that we couldn't possibly be over that line seems incredibly optimistic, as the only people who could potentially say for certain are employed in such incredibly niche positions that I doubt they're posting on here, and even if they were, they'd have to do months worth of reading and have access to information likely not in the public domain to make an accurate judgement. We have to trust that the PL are looking at this correctly, and that the relevant lawyers interpret it correctly. And that we get the result we want. But I go back to my initial point - People screaming that it's taking too long or they deserve to be informed or that they PL are being unprofessional just come across as whiny children who haven't got their sweets yet. I'm as frustrated as anyone, but I'm fully aware that the grown-ups are still doing their shopping and the sweets only come at the end. Hopefully we get sweets, but screaming for them and having a tantrum in the middle of aisle 8 seldom works.