Myleftboot Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 There’s going to be wet bed sheets al ower the shop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 Saying they've put in £200M+ of "new money" since the takeover, which I think was known already from the Companies House updates, but still. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geogaddi Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 Amnesty International have asked the Premier League to re-examine assurances made by Newcastle United’s ownership that the Saudi Arabian state will not be in control of the club. The request follows the publication of court documents in the United States this week, which suggests a closer relationship between the Saudi state and the Public Investment Fund (PIF), who own 80 per cent of Newcastle, than had previously been stated. The Premier League approved the takeover in October 2021 only after receiving “legally-binding assurances” that PIF was a separate entity to the state. They claimed the deal had been delayed by 18 months due to the separation issue. However, that level of separation has been questioned due to a brief filed in a court case between the PGA Tour and PIF-owned LIV Golf. In that, PIF describe themselves as “a sovereign instrumentality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” and Al Rumayyan as “a sitting minister of the Saudi government”. “It was always stretching credulity to breaking point to imagine that the Saudi state wasn’t directing the buyout of Newcastle with the ultimate aim of using the club as a component in its wider sportswashing efforts,” Peter Frankental, Amnesty UK’s economic affairs director, said. “There’s an unmistakable irony in the sovereign wealth fund declaration emerging in a dispute about another arm of Saudi Arabia’s growing sports empire, but the simple fact is that Saudi sportswashing is affecting numerous sports and governing bodies need to respond to it far more effectively. “The Premier League will surely need to re-examine the assurances made about the non-involvement of the Saudi authorities in the Newcastle deal, not least as there’s still a Qatari bid for Manchester United currently on the table.” Premier League chief executive Richard Masters told the BBC after the takeover that if evidence of state involvement was discovered, “we can remove the consortium as owners of the club”. The Premier League declined to comment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 It's just noise. PIF always has been an instrument of KSA, this isn't news. The Premier League know this, unfortunately they just don't care. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingcrofty Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 Do Amnesty genuinely think PIF are stupid enough to tell the PL that they’re separate and then stroll to America a year later and say they’re not separate, without being totally watertight on both arguments. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 To add to that, it's a case of semantics. YAR was a minister and the chairman of PIF when the takeover was approved by the PL. In short, they'll have wanted assurance that he'll only be acting in his capacity as the chairman of PIF and not as a KSA minister, in the day-to-day running of NUFC. The whole reason that is nonsense is because PIF is quite blatantly an instrument of KSA, but this has changed nothing regarding the relationship between PIF and NUFC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NWMag Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 6 minutes ago, The Prophet said: It's just noise. PIF always has been an instrument of KSA, this isn't news. The Premier League know this, unfortunately they just don't care. Fortunately don’t you mean? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexf Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 I think the statement made about separation when this went through was always bullshit and wouldn't stand up to any scrutiny. However it seems the Saudi's and premier League are on the same page now and would be shocked if the PL had the gumption to go back on their decision. It's not really in their interest to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 Just now, NWMag said: Fortunately don’t you mean? Nah, I'm pretty opposed to states, state instruments or state actors owning football clubs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackie Broon Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 24 minutes ago, bowlingcrofty said: Do Amnesty genuinely think PIF are stupid enough to tell the PL that they’re separate and then stroll to America a year later and say they’re not separate, without being totally watertight on both arguments. Otherwise known as the Schrödinger's CAT argument. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geogaddi Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 (edited) Sounds like other clubs in the league are now complaining about it Edited March 2, 2023 by Geogaddi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loki679 Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 1 hour ago, 54 said: Ritchie, Lewis, Manquillo, Dummett and Fraser: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattoon Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 I'm pretty sure they signed legally binding documentation in the wording of the state would not be involved in running NUFC, not that they were a separate entity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 55 minutes ago, bowlingcrofty said: Do Amnesty genuinely think PIF are stupid enough to tell the PL that they’re separate and then stroll to America a year later and say they’re not separate, without being totally watertight on both arguments. Meanwhile Amnesty seem to be silent on on other issues! https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/saudi-uk-ministers-agree-study-combat-air-co-operation-saudi-agency-2023-03-01/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keegans Export Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 16 minutes ago, Mattoon said: I'm pretty sure they signed legally binding documentation in the wording of the state would not be involved in running NUFC, not that they were a separate entity. I think that's probably it. As long as the decisions are being made by YAR, Staveley etc. not by a third party (someone not listed as a Director) I don't think there'll be an issue. Plus, as The Prophet says, the PL never objected to the takeover on moral grounds, it was purely piracy. The "separation" issue being settled just meant neither side had to admit it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 9 minutes ago, FloydianMag said: Meanwhile Amnesty seem to be silent on on other issues! https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/saudi-uk-ministers-agree-study-combat-air-co-operation-saudi-agency-2023-03-01/ You can't be serious Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHoob Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 1 hour ago, Mattoon said: I'm pretty sure they signed legally binding documentation in the wording of the state would not be involved in running NUFC, not that they were a separate entity. Aye, sick of banging this drum now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-more Mag Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 15 hours ago, The Prophet said: It doesn't really change anything. The PL knew he was a minister of KSA when PIF bought the club. As long as he's acting in his capacity as PIF Chairman in the day to day running of the club, it proves nothing. Correct. Basically the entire board of PIF is government ministers, and the government appoints directors when there’s a vacancy. That’s all long-known public information. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-more Mag Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 1 hour ago, Mattoon said: I'm pretty sure they signed legally binding documentation in the wording of the state would not be involved in running NUFC, not that they were a separate entity. Correct. Basically that the government wouldn’t directly interfere with the club. The “separation” thing has always been a dumbed down red herring pushed by the media. PIF is and always has been unequivocally an instrumentality of the KSA. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 If he is a part of the government though how isn't anything he does not direct intereference? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bada Bing Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 I'm yet to see any valid legal argument as to why PIF, including any politically exposed person who works within PIF, should not own or be a director of a PL football club. Because that's what it boils down to. It's not against the law or PL rules as far as I'm aware. Any ideas? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 6 minutes ago, Tiresias said: If he is a part of the government though how isn't anything he does not direct intereference? You see it a lot in Government, non-executive boards, etc. YAR must only act in his capacity as the chair of PIF in relation to NUFC, he has to leave his KSA ministerial duties at the door. It doesn't really make much sense though because PIF are ultimately acting in KSA's interests, as an instrument to the state. There will be lots of semantic like "direct influence" in the document text. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 (edited) @Bada BingOwners are meant to pass Fit and Proper Persons test (Owners and Directors test as it's called now) which includes this they have to sign up to the rules including this 'I have not provided any false, misleading or inaccurate information to the Board of the Premier League relating to my compliance with Rule F.1' So simply saying you are not part of the Saudi Government and then being it is a breach of premier league rules before you get into whether governments should Edited March 2, 2023 by Tiresias Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisMcQuillan Posted March 2, 2023 Share Posted March 2, 2023 You look at ministers in our government sitting on boards, awarding contracts to mates. The presence of a minister on the board, even on companies with government funding, doesn't mean the government is running the business. Technically. In reality, we all know it's a lot more likely there's Saudi influence indirectly. Also, there are far more important things for Amnesty International to be doing than this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now