Jump to content

Various: N-O has lost the plot over potential end of Mike Ashley's tenure


Jinky Jim

Recommended Posts

Another one trying to stop this happening:

 

https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/sport/national/18403083.government-urged-not-sit-bench-proposed-newcastle-takeover/

 

An MP from Sheffield...I wonder if Sheffield United is anything to do with this one. Possibly not but you never know. Had a quick search and I can't find any other examples of him being vocally against Saudi Arabia, seems a bit of a random thing to be troubling him so much tbh.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1436390/Commons-to-bar-MP-over-Brazilian-escort.html :lol:

 

These whiter than white types at it again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without direct links to Ashley I may be a little more acceptable of Steve Bruce keeping on til the end of the season and maybe even including him in the club to some capacity going forward. I don't think he's got the tactical or studious ability that we'll need playing to a higher level but he probably does bring some motivation to the club and perhaps would help encourage the playing staff towards the more localised link and love of the club. That said, I could just be being soft because I keep hearing examples of how he's such a nice bloke  :lol:

 

This is a perfect example of how propaganda can get to someone  :lol:

 

Lol, you're totally right, I know what it is too - I'm thinking he could be the new Terry Mac, putting the cones out and nipping to the bookies for the players  :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't believe the illegal streaming thing is an issue. The amount of people in the UK that participate in illegal internet-based activities is utterly absurd.

 

Reminds me of Salford City's dodgy box in their club house :lol:

 

It's not illegal internet streaming.  It's hijacking the transmission broadcasts of Bein and then broadcasting as their own with beoutQ branding.

 

Correct me if I’m wrong. SA nor PIF is accused of doing this themselves*, but SA is accused of not policing it hard enough, right?

 

* last court case to this effect in France came to nothing, so I doubt the PL can assume direct involvement as a ground for not passing the O&D test

Link to post
Share on other sites

New non executive chairman appointed to the PL who worked for Barclays. Jobs for the boys for sure, but I did wonder if Amanda Staveleys case against the bank might come under scrutiny in relation to this guys affiliations.

 

Hopefully the deal is done before he gets his teeth into it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

New non executive chairman appointed to the PL who worked for Barclays. Jobs for the boys for sure, but I did wonder if Amanda Staveleys case against the bank might come under scrutiny in relation to this guys affiliations.

 

Hopefully the deal is done before he gets his teeth into it.

 

You are two days late on your news and no, he wasnt part of Staveleys law suit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest neesy111

Can't believe the illegal streaming thing is an issue. The amount of people in the UK that participate in illegal internet-based activities is utterly absurd.

 

Reminds me of Salford City's dodgy box in their club house :lol:

 

It's not illegal internet streaming.  It's hijacking the transmission broadcasts of Bein and then broadcasting as their own with beoutQ branding.

 

Correct me if I’m wrong. SA nor PIF is accused of doing this themselves*, but SA is accused of not policing it hard enough, right?

 

* last court couse to this effect in France came to nothing, so I doubt the PL can assume direct involvement as a ground for not passing the O&D test

 

It's Saudi Arabia as a country, not PIF that are accused as not doing enough against it.  Yes, they didn't win in France however EU did release a report in January about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

New non executive chairman appointed to the PL who worked for Barclays. Jobs for the boys for sure, but I did wonder if Amanda Staveleys case against the bank might come under scrutiny in relation to this guys affiliations.

 

Hopefully the deal is done before he gets his teeth into it.

 

You are two days late on your news and no, he wasnt part of Staveleys law suit.

 

Yellow ticker on sky sports news right now, I hadn’t really seen much about it before now.

 

I’m not suggesting that he was part of her complaint, more so that he has allegiance to his former colleagues maybe? I hope not

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest neesy111

I mean, its bloody obvious that they are guilty but it wont be proven.

 

Guilty of what though? Illegal broadcasting? I don’t think that’s bloody obvious at all from what I’ve read.

 

Saudi Arabia are guilty as they come regarding it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, its bloody obvious that they are guilty but it wont be proven.

 

Guilty of what though? Illegal broadcasting? I don’t think that’s bloody obvious at all from what I’ve read.

 

Saudi Arabia are guilty as they come regarding it.

 

Saudi Arabia as in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the country?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest godzilla

I mean, its bloody obvious that they are guilty but it wont be proven.

 

Guilty of what though? Illegal broadcasting? I don’t think that’s bloody obvious at all from what I’ve read.

 

Saudi Arabia are guilty as they come regarding it.

 

Can they find definitive proof that any of the company directors are directly part of any illegal broadcasting?, as that is what has to be established before they can use that to fail the premier league fit and proper persons test.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest neesy111

I mean, its bloody obvious that they are guilty but it wont be proven.

 

Guilty of what though? Illegal broadcasting? I don’t think that’s bloody obvious at all from what I’ve read.

 

Saudi Arabia are guilty as they come regarding it.

 

Saudi Arabia as in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the country?

 

Yes Saudi Arabia which is a country of guilty of it, this piracy is part of their proxy war with Qatar and it started immediately after their blockade of Qatar started.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest neesy111

I mean, its bloody obvious that they are guilty but it wont be proven.

 

Guilty of what though? Illegal broadcasting? I don’t think that’s bloody obvious at all from what I’ve read.

 

Saudi Arabia are guilty as they come regarding it.

 

Can they find definitive proof that any of the company directors are directly part of any illegal broadcasting?, as that is what has to be established before they can use that to fail the premier league fit and proper persons test.

 

I've said multiple times it won't be blocking this deal unless somehow the PL have found some definitive evidence that those at PIF are responsible for the piracy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest godzilla

I mean, its bloody obvious that they are guilty but it wont be proven.

 

Guilty of what though? Illegal broadcasting? I don’t think that’s bloody obvious at all from what I’ve read.

 

Saudi Arabia are guilty as they come regarding it.

 

Can they find definitive proof that any of the company directors are directly part of any illegal broadcasting?, as that is what has to be established before they can use that to fail the premier league fit and proper persons test.

 

I've said multiple times it won't be blocking this deal unless somehow the PL have found some definitive evidence that those at PIF are responsible for the piracy.

 

Doubt they will.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest neesy111

I mean, its bloody obvious that they are guilty but it wont be proven.

 

Guilty of what though? Illegal broadcasting? I don’t think that’s bloody obvious at all from what I’ve read.

 

Saudi Arabia are guilty as they come regarding it.

 

Can they find definitive proof that any of the company directors are directly part of any illegal broadcasting?, as that is what has to be established before they can use that to fail the premier league fit and proper persons test.

 

I've said multiple times it won't be blocking this deal unless somehow the PL have found some definitive evidence that those at PIF are responsible for the piracy.

 

Doubt they will.

 

Correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest godzilla

I mean, its bloody obvious that they are guilty but it wont be proven.

 

Guilty of what though? Illegal broadcasting? I don’t think that’s bloody obvious at all from what I’ve read.

 

Saudi Arabia are guilty as they come regarding it.

 

Can they find definitive proof that any of the company directors are directly part of any illegal broadcasting?, as that is what has to be established before they can use that to fail the premier league fit and proper persons test.

 

I've said multiple times it won't be blocking this deal unless somehow the PL have found some definitive evidence that those at PIF are responsible for the piracy.

 

Doubt they will.

 

Correct.

:thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...