Dr Jinx

Non takeover related post (sort of) but for any of you who have used a Kodi app or an IPTV service, you’ll see that pretty much every single game is televised now. In the states they pretty much get their pick of the live games every week. Just go to the channel showing your team. I’m almost certain if they did this in the UK, people wouldn’t mind paying a season ticket fee, say £100 or whatever, I’d be happy to pay that if I knew I could watch Newcastle when I wanted and not have to worry about a stream that cuts out etc. Between BT and Sky and whoever I’m sure they could figure out how to do it. Currently we’re paying more for less if you go with Virgin Media or Sky. I’m not saying it’s right but there’s a reason streaming took off. You wouldn’t get to see your team play on tv if you didn’t avail of something dodgy. Or the PL could go it alone and make every game available as a subscription and just broadcast through an app, like Disney or Netflix, they’d make more revenue from people signing up around the world and they’d stamp out piracy pretty much.

I don’t think this was a vanity project as much as it was a means to get at Qatar from another angle. Money is no object here. They have seen through almost 3 years of a blockade. They are not going to back down because the PL ask nicely. All the letters sent, the bad noise from BeIn, the Qatar funded WTO report.. it will have focussed them on their goal. We are totally irrelevant in this. They could have chosen any club. And any success will surely be enjoyed by them but the short term goals are to put a stop to the dominance of PSG in the market. The minute players know they can get similar deals not in the French league, PSG will find it very difficult to be signing the likes of Neymar and Mbappe in a few years from now.

Bloody hell, what a s***-bag What an absolute shitbag move. Fully intended.

I think Barclays will settle for a lesser amount if it isn’t shot down at the first hurdle. (which is what they are hoping for by contesting it)

I’m fairly sure BeIn let it be known that they would be seeking some sort of compensation if the deal goes through, possibly withholding future payments (if any) Richard Masters has probably been already assured that SA will take up the slack if this were to happen and would be acquiring the rights next time around. If BeIn had to let go of a hundred staff over the decline in revenue relating to BeoutQ, they might not be in a position to bid next time anyway.

The number of countries who have murdered journalists is quite short - and the list of those who have dismembered journalists shorter still. Let's not p*ss on our legs and say it's raining. I’d argue that the 2007 video that Wikileaks put out of the Americans killing several journalists and civilians and laughing about it was equally as chilling. The USA and the UK for that matter have far more blood on their hands than Saudi do overall. So let’s not sit up on some moral high horse. I’m not saying we should condone any of it by the way, we shouldn’t, but if you’re going to criticise one nation right now you should also be able to turn that magnifying glass on others too. Are any of those countries buying the club or what has this got to do with anything? I doubt many would want Trump owning us. So does your moral conscience only kick in when it’s related to Newcastle United? I personally don’t care who own the club as long as the right manager is in place and the club is showing ambition. Besides, we don’t get a choice in this.

The number of countries who have murdered journalists is quite short - and the list of those who have dismembered journalists shorter still. Let's not p*ss on our legs and say it's raining. I’d argue that the 2007 video that Wikileaks put out of the Americans killing several journalists and civilians and laughing about it was equally as chilling. The USA and the UK for that matter have far more blood on their hands than Saudi do overall. So let’s not sit up on some moral high horse. I’m not saying we should condone any of it by the way, we shouldn’t, but if you’re going to criticise one nation right now you should also be able to turn that magnifying glass on others too.

The whole issue of hidden agendas has been talked through at length at this stage. We know Qatar have one. What I’m questioning is why would you need a London based law firm to handle your correspondence? She could have sent the letter herself. What legal claim against the premier league could be possibly have? Surely that would open up all manner of cans/worms with all of PIF’s investments. Nobody here is questioning her personal motive, she wants Saudi to be accountable. But they won’t be. That’s life. Just like every other country who’s done fucked up shit in the past. It gets left there. Saudi haven’t done anything worse than what most other nations have done historically, they were just stupid enough to get caught in the act where Khashoggi was concerned. Even North Korea did a better job of assassinating that guy in the airport

I was just reading the bbc article about the response to the Khashoggi widow, and it occurred to me, like who is she that she can afford top legal representation based in London? They don’t take on pro bono work from what I can see.

I honestly had an easier time understanding the premier leagues owners and directors test than reading that.

Look at the head on him

Why would the Public Investment Fund of Saudi be involved with tv piracy? The notion is mental. The question is are the Premier League differentiating between PIF and the rest of the Kingdom? I’m fairly certain Yasir Al-Rumayyan is squeaky clean. So his part in PIF isn’t in question. It’s how they view MBS. Do the PL have the balls to label him as a criminal and thus putting all that trade they do with the UK into question? That is what’s at stake if they are embarrassed here.

Nahh, things will get a lot weirder before reason prevails.

Absolute bullplop. Anything coming from Qatar directly or indirectly is an agenda. This includes, BeIN, Aljazeera and any journalists who have written pieces for local news there. Journalists should be balanced in what they write, this is rarely the case though so how can you not accuse someone of having an agenda if they only write pieces from a pre determined conclusion?

It’s not comparable. Outrage culture hadn’t really kicked off at that stage. Nobody really used Twitter. Certainly entities using the internet to manipulate a narrative wasn’t as sophisticated as it is now. This is all new as far as a club takeover goes. It also doesn’t get much bigger which is why everyone seems to have an opinion on it and why there are so many obstacles to overcome. At the end of the day, the people with objections are not wrong morally. Their motives are a different story however. All we can do is hope that the PL can differentiate and decide they won’t be used as a puppet in a geopolitical situation.

Absolute bullshit. The city fans if anything have been the least salty about it. It won’t go to a replay in any case.

He’s a right smug looking cunt

You lost me there

I’m sure there is a backup that it can be restored from?

Ring by a certain off RTG I heard that, fair played though. Poked as much fun at the media as the nufc supporters. Although, you’d have to be obsessed with our club to see an account like that through for a few years.

Can’t say I disagreed with anything he said there. Like he mentioned, without naming names that some journalists have been stringing us along creating an anticipation that turns to anxiety rather quickly. I’m firmly in the camp now that the checks have only just started. Which is a good thing, all the Khashoggi widows letters, all the objections by Qatar in the various forms, it’s all been said now. No spiders in the closet. We just have to be hopeful that Saudi have enough evidence that points to them not being a direct part of the BeoutQ thing. Or providing the detail in how they tried to shut it down. I think overall that’s where this will live or die. The PL will come at an angle of assuming involvement. Saudi have to change their minds.

I have nothing to back it up but my opinion on this is that they either haven’t started the test yet or have only begun it in the last few days. Far too busy with the legal implications of either voiding or restarting the season. And they are hardly going to admit that they don’t have the resource to do both at the same time. Maybe the preliminary financial checks have been done but the serious stuff hasn’t been looked at yet. His wording in interviews is the giveaway. “I can’t make any comment that would prejudice the process” If the process had been concluded, how could he prejudice it?

You think that's such a reach? This thread is littered with people saying "They probably were involved in the piracy, but nobody can prove it lol". In the reasonable opinion of a great number of people on this board, the Saudi government have been behind the piracy. Now I'm not a solicitor or lawyer, so I cannot speculate on what level of proof, if any, is required to have a "reasonable opinion" on anything. All I'm saying is that it's preposterous to suggest that this cannot fail. Oh they could reject it alright but it would be a diplomatic shit show. It would be like someone telling the Queen that she couldn’t own horses because her family have a few known diddlers

There is NO requirement for anything to be proven. None. It's "in the reasonable opinion of the board". That's it. No conviction is required, no "hard evidence" needed, the board just have to decide, in their own opinion, that if they'd done this in the UK then it would be "on offence". That is all that is required to fail this test. Yes. I posted it. In the reasonable opinion of the board have they engaged in conduct outside the United Kingdom that would constitute an offence of the sort described in rules: F.1.5.2 or F.1.5.3. F.1.5.2. in respect of which an unsuspended sentence of at least 12 months’ imprisonment was imposed; in respect of any offence involving any act which could reasonably be considered to be dishonest (and, for the avoidance of doubt, irrespective of the actual sentence imposed); or F.1.5.3. in respect of an offence set out in Appendix 1 (Schedule of Offences) or a directly analogous (comparable) offence in a foreign jurisdiction (and, for the avoidance of doubt, irrespective of the actual sentence imposed); So the board have to reasonably come to a conclusion that MBS or YAR have been involved in any act which could be considered dishonest. So a crown prince or the head or PIF and Aramco will be deemed to have acted dishonestly? It’s a cluster fuck if they were to do that.

So has either MBS or Yasir Al-Rumayyan been convinced of any crime? No. Are they skint? No. Have they conducted any sort of dishonest act that would be deemed prosecutorial in the United Kingdom? Well, certainly not that could be proven. So the answer again is no. You would have to have evidence that either MBS or Yasir Al-Rumayyan had direct involvement in BeoutQ, say for example a photo of him holding the box giving a massive thumbs up.. Being the head of a state does not make you responsible for every crime committed within it. In the case of BeoutQ, if it’s proven that they have used Arabsat to steal BeIn’s IP, that’s more of a corporate crime and can always be passed off as someone within the organisation taking a bung to allow it. It’s impossible to track it back to MBS. Unless they have devised a whole new test just for us and nobody else, I can’t see any reason why this can be stopped, according to their own rules.