Geordie Ahmed

They’re rapidly on the decline, like. Have they got many promising youngsters coming through? Fati and Puig look like they will become top players The issue is the squad is average and all over the place, whoever has been responsible for their transfers has done a horrendous job Over the years Messi has bailed them out and covered up their shit transfer policy but he's not quite as good as he was

Against Aston Villa... Give credit where it’s due. He identified the player he needed the transform things and they’ve been unbeaten going back to February including a convincing win against City. They are going to be right in the mix next season. I don't think we're going to be close to the title next year, but we're going to be a threat again and will comfortably finish top four. This has been a good season with very positive signs. It can still end with a top four finish and two trophies. I actually think you will challenge next season He's got the attacking players firing, Fernandes signing has been huge. 1-2 signings and there's no reason you won't be amongst it next season.

That's insane Are they going to just pretend he didn't have that game against City

Baffling, thought it was quite clear

I made Vardy captain

Al-Rumayyan is the Chairman of Aramco so if this takeover fails then there is no chance Aramco can complete a takeover, all issues (human rights, piracy etc) would be the same

Doesn't Gotze have some health condition which caused him lots of injuries in the past or is he fully over that?

He does but I think it started with Rafa, he hates us but he loves Bruce, it's why he got giddy when Bruce picked up more points than Rafa at similar stages

Unless I've missed something else but isn't the problem Keys has with us not due to Rafa? He slated Rafa (with him being a forrin) and we've defended Rafa (aside from the odd knuckle dragger) and I think he has struggled to accept that. His narrative that Rafa isn't all that and that he is a greedy man with no integrity (ironic much) is one we reject. You mix that with his employers being involved in a political war with Saudi Arabia and the end result is toxic Hairy Potter.

Love that from Rafa ??

The are quoting the sun

I assume they are working it out based on official confirmation from the PL early next week and the 3-5 days for funds to transfer

Wanting to win a trophy (first time in most fans lifteime) is deserving of an ASBO? I dislike Bruce but it's easily 1

You've got two WBAs in there. Must be a typo as Ba was West Ham

If they do say no I suspect the premier league facebook page is going to get bombarded I've no idea how they'll cope with that. I'm sure that'll bring the whole organisation of the PL to its knees. That wasn't the point I was making

If they do say no I suspect the premier league facebook page is going to get bombarded

Those investments to my knowledge weren't subject to a test like ours is The investment in us is a tiny, tiny portion of the total PIF assets. The letters are clearly about raising awareness which is understandable but those are huge companies so you would expect similar letters at least addressing the concerns even if the end result is just a bit of awareness

Aye, its the worst argument of all time. Awful. Not really the worst is it though If you think the takeover should not be allowed to go through on moral grounds (which btw is a stance anyone is entitled to and it's understandable) but then you happily view/consume content/products in which they also have investments it's hypocrisy, now some people are comfortable being selective and again that's their prerogative but the hypocrisy can be called out No it is not hypocrisy at all. These things are not comparable. I have to put petrol in my car, and even if i didn't I get the bus, so that consumes petrol. I have to get home from town, so I use an uber. There are things that you use in a society because you have to. The argument that I should quit using uber is ridiculous. If we applied that logic unilaterally, nobody could disagree with anything. Hate capitalism mate, well you've got an iphone! Check mate! Take away the essential products then, you don't need Disney products or need to use Facebook or need to have Starbucks etc That's where the hypocrisy lies, I don't expect people to stop driving but if you object to the takeover on moral grounds but you blast through Disney+ then aye that's a bit dodgy and selective So what you're saying is that Newcastle United is the same to you as any other business? That's fine if that's your position but it's a bit of a weird one for most football fans. NUFC is the worldwide representative of my city so I'm inclined to want to be able to feel proud of it and what it stands for. The only way it's comparable with Uber or Disney is if you have an emotional stake in those businesses. I couldn't give two fucks if they went under tomorrow so it's not the same in the slightest. I care more if someone kills my wife than if someone kills your wife. That's not hypocrisy, it's life. I care more about things I care about than things I don't. That's not my position at all, I want the takeover to go ahead even if I can at the same time accept the SA regime has issues If you (or anyone else) don't care about those businesses and whether they go under then it's easier to leave those things in comparison to the emotional investment of nufc I've previously said there is an element of hypocrisy in us all, I've said if it was the Israeli government buying us I would object but i'm not oblivious to the fact it would be hypocritical

Aye, its the worst argument of all time. Awful. Not really the worst is it though If you think the takeover should not be allowed to go through on moral grounds (which btw is a stance anyone is entitled to and it's understandable) but then you happily view/consume content/products in which they also have investments it's hypocrisy, now some people are comfortable being selective and again that's their prerogative but the hypocrisy can be called out No it is not hypocrisy at all. These things are not comparable. I have to put petrol in my car, and even if i didn't I get the bus, so that consumes petrol. I have to get home from town, so I use an uber. There are things that you use in a society because you have to. The argument that I should quit using uber is ridiculous. If we applied that logic unilaterally, nobody could disagree with anything. Hate capitalism mate, well you've got an iphone! Check mate! Take away the essential products then, you don't need Disney products or need to use Facebook or need to have Starbucks etc That's where the hypocrisy lies, I don't expect people to stop driving but if you object to the takeover on moral grounds but you blast through Disney+ then aye that's a bit dodgy and selective

Aye, its the worst argument of all time. Awful. Not really the worst is it though If you think the takeover should not be allowed to go through on moral grounds (which btw is a stance anyone is entitled to and it's understandable) but then you happily view/consume content/products in which they also have investments it's hypocrisy, now some people are comfortable being selective and again that's their prerogative but the hypocrisy can be called out

PIF have bought shares in Disney, Facebook and Starbucks.

I've veered from mildly optimistic to increasingly concerned that the premier league are going to finally grow some balls and quite rightly tell the Saudi's that the answer is no for anyone of a myriad of reasons. The thought of leaving us with Ashley and Bruce is just too horrible to contemplate, I would like to say that I'll be finished with football and the club but it's not so easy after supporting them for over 50 years. I don't think I can be finished with football but the thought of Ashley/Bruce remaining is nauseating

It was that Henry Mauriss, think most people rubbished it

That makes no sense, so they are going to fail the current test but get told to bid again in the future which will involve a more stringent test than the one they failed?

I see no reason for it not too. I think Midds has summed it up well. A document of alleged proof from a 3rd party (who likely have political motives) will not be considered enough evidence to prevent a takeover. It would have to have been proven in a court of law. Aside from that, that is assuming the Premier League consider PIF and the Saudi government to be one and the same, they have alluded that they do not. when did they allude to this? In their reply to Amnesty the said a company based in Saudi Arabia, not sure whether that means a great deal really "I write in reply to your letter on April 20 concerning the putative takeover of Newcastle United FC by a company based in Saudi Arabia. "You will appreciate that these matters are often subject to media speculations but at their heart are due processes required by UK law and by the Premier League's own rules, which can't be conducted in public and on which we can't comment. "However, I can assure you that these processes go beyond those required by UK company Law and they are applied with equal rigour to every single prospective purchase of a Premier League club."