St. Maximin

Agree it’s a useful point, but I don’t think most people are so bothered by the result as the performance and tactics. It was absolute rubbish and USA would have deservedly won with a better striker. Southgate’s limitations were shown up again and refusing to use Foden is just weird. We should be building the team around him, let alone bringing him off the bench when starved of creativity.

In hindsight, I’m not so annoyed about the defensive approach as I am the fact we were absolute turd. I know it’s been mentioned before that winners of international tournaments can often be dull to watch, but that wasn’t a solid performance in spite of that. It was a complete shambles. We should be thankful Maguire played well, but also that USA don’t have a good striker. They outplayed us otherwise and had the better chances. I feel there’s no defence for that, even if they have decent players there, as we should at least be controlling these games.

To an extent I think that’s true, but ironically actually partly why Southgate has (at least historically) been so popular and why he and the team won SPOTY awards last year etc. We were still in the mindset they were these valiant losers doing the nation proud against all odds, rather than one of the favourites (if not the favourite) being outfoxed in a final of a tournament we virtually hosted as far as we were concerned. Saying that the views have often been a bit weirdly polarised imo. Some people despise him for reasons I can’t understand, like they have short term memories and forgot how depressing being an England fan was prior to 2018 or would be under Allardyce. He absolutely deserves credit for his achievements and also absolutely deserves a lot of the criticism that comes his way, tonight especially. It just shows his limitations that he can’t trust some of his more exciting and creative players and it’s so frustrating and puzzling to watch, like he’s deliberately trying to be boring with his ideas that clearly didn’t work when they mattered most (Croatia 2018, Italy 2021). It’s just such an English mentality to be overly cautious and suspicious of anyone a bit more maverick. Also what is Mason Mount doing getting 90 minutes every game?

At least half the Wales team can now support England.

I agree people have been unnecessarily critical of Southgate (at times), but I’m not sure how the opposite applies to Belgium here in that case. The only ‘golden generation’ embarrassment was losing to Wales in 2016, which was before Martinez took over. They were decent in 2018, finishing third and knocked out by the strongest side since Spain’s golden generation. I’d say the Euros were disappointing mind, but not a shambles. They again lost to the eventual winners, without the constant home advantage England had.

Can’t not like him after that. Really nice how much he seems to care about his family and disabilities too. And I’m not really that disgusted by the Almiron comment anyway. Funny as some of the comments since have been though

Telly-washing. Sickening stuff really. What about Yemen?!?!

Kane was excellent today despite not scoring and creates a lot of goals. He’s certainly not selfish (well accept maybe when he’s going to extreme lengths to claim goals in a golden boot race). Would have liked to see Foden start, but happy with Southgate today. The 4-3-3 was excellent and I hope he persists with it against the better sides, especially given there’s solid defensive cover in midfield. Saka offers so much in directness and end-product and Bellingham’s ability combined with maturity at 19 is ridiculous.

For the record I think a lot of the Saudi apologists among our fanbase (a very small minority) are smart enough to realise the potentially difficult moral position of supporting a team owned by KSA, so are almost justifying it to themselves by pointing out things like death sentences being carried out against terrorists etc.

I agree on the subjectivity and ultimately I’m happy for people to care more or less than I do. Don’t really agree on the sportswashing though. At least I think the sportswashing people are concerned about is on a much bigger scale. These are a small minority of our fanbase, let alone the UK as a whole and thus their impact is minimal. They are morons and you find those in every fan base. This has just given them a voice. I try not to worry too much about them.

Ultimately I support Newcastle and feel no allegiance to the Saudi state. While there will always be some discomfort at this takeover, a proportionate reaction is needed. We are 80% owned by the investment fund of the government, which invests in businesses all over the world and often far bigger amounts. The people we are aware are mostly involved in the club seem like decent and likeable people, who are committed to the club's development and that includes significant developments to the women's team, while also wanting to engage with the fans and benefit the region. This may include PIF employees, who are ultimately human beings also and do not necessarily share their moral compasses of the most powerful in the country (as with governments across the world). We have and will no doubt continue to benefit from the PIF's money, but it's still a club ran by great people with positive ideas for the club and fans rather than us simply becoming a soulless business growing due to 'blood money' (not sure how people come to that conclusion anyway). As for the Saudi connection, we're hardly advertising their values, human rights etc. If anything it's more likely to make people visit the country and have a positive experience in the same way people do to other gulf states with bad reputations for human rights. It's also pretty subtle relative to how it could be - bit different to having Sports Direct everywhere you look in the stadium.

Fair, all good points, though personally I don't really hear much about sanctions avoidance from the critics. I mostly hear about how sportwashing improves a reputation by deflecting negative attention, with the idea countries can commit atrocities behind the front of a football club, which to me doesn't really make sense due to the added media exposure. I can understand the issue of sanctions avoidance (compared to Russia, for example, who are not our allies), though as has been mentioned the greater media exposure and economic connections could help show they cannot continue to behave as they do and get away with it.

An argument I've seen is they don't control the majority of those companies like with NUFC. The flip side is they are much bigger and therefore far more Saudi money has gone into them. Ultimately people can choose their position and what they feel happy with or not and I'm fine with that. More an issue when people start telling people what to think or try to influence a takeover to be blocked due to 'sportswashing'. It's fine to be concerned about that, but it's a subjective take on a situation rather than a legal issue and therefore not a reason to prevent a business transaction.

It certainly happens but the question is more how effective is it? Supporters of a club even the size of Chelsea make up a small minority of football fans in the country, let alone the world, so a small minority of them choosing to be his apologist can't be that effective in the grand scheme of things as the overall reaction to the war here has shown. With regards to Russia, the 2018 WC is an argument it worked because many people were saying it's a great place to visit. That in itself can't be bad - last year I was thinking I'd like to visit at some point and maybe still will, despite the human rights abuses. At the same time the war shows its limitations because I doubt many of the 2018 fans who visited are defending it now. That the war happens to be in Europe and Russia are not one of our allies doesn't help their cause mind.

Yeah how I see it, so in a sense it’s still about reputation. The way some talk though is as if they’re trying to please us worthy westerners or hoping by buying a club those reports about human rights abuses will just go away. I really don’t think those apologists have much of an impact though - they’re very small in number and if anything are a hindrance when they get noticed on Twitter etc.

I think any improvements to the reputation would be in the long-term, but I’m pretty sceptical of a lot of these claims that journalists and Amnesty International like to use - “whitewashing their brutal regime”, “laundering their reputation”, “cover up atrocities behind the front of a football club” etc. If you’ve got a bad reputation, it won’t just go away because you bought a club, especially if there’s added media attention. What this will likely do is have indirect economic benefits to KSA as it tries to diversify its economy and as such this will still be part of providing a positive image towards the country and encourage tourism etc. Therefore the benefits from ‘sportswashing’ aren’t necessarily bad. As long as they’re in the public sphere I can’t see how their abuses will go unnoticed though and if anything they’re get more attention - the last and next World Cup and prime examples of the limitations of sportswashing.

Grealish helped us win the Championship and now he’s made Miggy into a future Ballon d’Or winner while providing much amusement through his poor form. We owe a lot to the guy.

Tbh I love supporting the club hundreds of times more than I did under most of the Ashley era, but even then I will always feel somewhat uneasy at our (majority) owners. At the same time you may find some fans who couldn’t care less and some who are deeply uncomfortable even if few and far between. Each to their own really and there’s no morally right or wrong position to be. You don’t have to love your owners and like I’d wager the vast majority of our fans, I feel no allegiance to KSA or need to defend their human rights record. It’s sad when I see people who do, but I think these are a small minority and unfortunately every club will have its share of moron supporters for one reason or another and this just happens to be a way to demonstrate it. You can’t change people sadly. I also find it odd how many of our fans get defensive to criticism of KSA’s sports investment, but saying that many people do it hypocritically and can use it to attack the fans, so to an extent it’s understandable. At the same time as feeling uneasy about human rights, for all the concerns about ‘sportswashing’ (rightly or wrongly), I have no doubt this takeover will have positive impacts in KSA and ultimately I don’t see that as bad. I think it’s also fair to point out we have multiple people (UK and KSA) that must have some direct or indirect involvement in how the club rather than simply being Bin Salman’s. I have little knowledge of the PIF employees’ views on human rights, but personally I don’t expect them to all be evil people with a moral compass to reflect his.

He played like Almiron when he came on.

Emery has now managed Aston Villa, Villarreal, Sevilla and David Villa. Sure he has a nice villa or two in Spain also.

Don't think enough is mentioned about how good he is at signing good blokes as well as players. All the signings seem likeable, honest professionals that really get the club and city. I think Fraser and Burn were saying a while back on Sky Sports how much the likes of Trippier and Wood (for all his limitations on the pitch) are having impacts off the pitch. Good results and atmosphere clearly help, but having a very likeable bunch of players that seem to get on it and not have ego problems seems to be helping a lot here.

Personally I think the reaction to it could be a bit patronising to Miggy. Like Grealish is the bully and Miggy is this innocent weak child. Reality is Grealish is just a stupid young man who was hammered and Miggy is still a tough premier league footballer who has shown before he has a bit of shithousery in him (well attempts to cheat actually). Maybe not quite the angelic child he might look. Plus he’s 28 and has probably been called far worse so I imagine he’s not let that get to him too much. However, Grealish has continued to be be terrible while Miggy has been phenomenal since that was posted, plus Grealish is no doubt a massive whopper. So still pretty funny.

Bit of a humiliation for Palace here. Interesting how Lampard is a ‘PFM’ but Vieira seems to be this exciting up and coming manager. Everton seem to be in a much better place since Rafa left even if they’re still a bit crap.

Perez is one of those players that gets judged more harshly on his end-product because he’s thought of as a striker, despite typically not playing there. He was an attacking mid/winger that scored 12 in a Rafa team that finished 13th and people thought was terrible. He was frustrating mind, due to to the sheer disparity between how he started and ended the seasons.

No I completely agree with you here. Aside from the odd nice spell where we had some impressive performances (e.g. Bournemouth away 2020, Leicester away 2021), we were absolute turd to watch and it should have been apparent to anyone that the organisation and plan we had under Rafa had been unravelling and not replaced. I was just saying based on the final league positions he wouldn't have been deemed a failure. I think he was in probably every other way here and he also would have taken us down if he'd stayed, but if you didn't watch the football closely (like I imagine the West Brom chairman didn't), then it would be easy to look at that record and think he did well enough to keep us safe. We had a poor squad with injury problems to our star players. He also must have had a decent Championship record until Villa as he managed to get teams promoted. He could probably get away with his managerial style of being a 'man manager' more back in the day, but hasn't been bothered to learn and progress with the times.