PIF and RB Sports & Media

[Stifler]

I’m not reading it, balanced or not.

 

Having a go at football fans for celebrating winning their first domestic trophy in 70 years, whilst their paymasters are defending Isreal bombing kids in Gaza/Palestien for the last 80 years.

The fight they have chosen to pick is the wrong one.

[Kaizero]

10 minutes ago, The Prophet said:

 

Fair enough.

 

It is rather unusual and seemed rather deliberate though.

 

I felt quite uncomfortable with it, granted I'll need to get used to the hot soapy sportswash, particularly if we become more successful.

 

I don't think there's a right or wrong answer here by the way, no one should tell you how to feel. But I think the author did a good job of raising his subjective discomfort, along with my own, whilst still giving us our flowers.

 

For me, if the owner has seemed enthusiastic about the club and given interviews about how they plan to run/run the club, they should be allowed to partake in celebrations when the club they own achieve success. 

 

I feel nobody can argue that Yasir hasn't been vocal about his desire to improve the club, win trophies and more. He's put "his" money where his mouth is, he's entitled to celebrate.

 

Club owners that choose to run their "property" from the shadows and aren't vocal/visible in their role(s), however? They can stay in the director's box when the team win something... like the below. The below is absolute bullshit, the guy's been at a match once since taking over the club:

 

 

 

Edited Sunday at 19:24 by Kaizero

[Kaizero]

3 minutes ago, Stifler said:

I’m not reading it, balanced or not.

 

Having a go at football fans for celebrating winning their first domestic trophy in 70 years, whilst their paymasters are defending Isreal bombing kids in Gaza/Palestien for the last 80 years.

The fight they have chosen to pick is the wrong one.

 

This is a bit "whatabout"-ish to be honest. Israel being genocidal cunts doesn't mean Saudi Arabia should get away with the shit they do. Both states should be stopped from doing what they're doing.

 

Now, I don't know if the NY Times are very pro-Israel in their news coverage or not. If they are, your point is very valid, and I apologize for mentioning whataboutism

[NE27]

Is it wrong that him quickly doing a trophy lift didn't bother me in the slightest?

 

Didn't feel he was front and center of it all, in fact I'd say Amanda and mehrdad got more coverage beyond getting hold of the trophy.

[Stifler]

8 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

This is a bit "whatabout"-ish to be honest. Israel being genocidal cunts doesn't mean Saudi Arabia should get away with the shit they do. Both states should be stopped from doing what they're doing.

 

Now, I don't know if the NY Times are very pro-Israel in their news coverage or not. If they are, your point is very valid, and I apologize for mentioning whataboutism

I don’t think it is, I think it’s context.

You want to report on the important matters, you want to hold people accountable, then actually fucking doing.

Having a go at football fans for the crime of being football fans is far from the point of their profession.

[The Prophet]

14 minutes ago, Stifler said:

I’m not reading it, balanced or not.

 

Having a go at football fans for celebrating winning their first domestic trophy in 70 years, whilst their paymasters are defending Isreal bombing kids in Gaza/Palestien for the last 80 years.

The fight they have chosen to pick is the wrong one.

 

It isn't having a go at the football fans, that's why I felt it was a refreshingly balanced read. Sportswashing and state ownership are important topics in football.

[The Prophet]

14 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

For me, if the owner has seemed enthusiastic about the club and given interviews about how they plan to run/run the club, they should be allowed to partake in celebrations when the club they own achieve success. 

 

I feel nobody can argue that Yasir hasn't been vocal about his desire to improve the club, win trophies and more. He's put "his" money where his mouth is, he's entitled to celebrate.

 

Club owners that choose to run their "property" from the shadows and aren't vocal/visible in their role(s), however? They can stay in the director's box when the team win something... like the below. The below is absolute bullshit, the guy's been at a match once since taking over the club:

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I say it's all subjective and down to the individual about how they feel about it and the PIF ownership in general.

 

As Stifler points out it takes absolutely nothing away from the players and staff who worked incredibly hard for the cup and the fans who've waited a lifetime for us to lift one.

[Tsunami]

Don’t mind that article at all. The point I’ll take away from it and which shouldn’t be forgotten is that Ashley was killing the club and couldn’t find another buyer.

 

Had another buyer come in then it’s conceivably we’d be that same point albeit by a different path. It’s also possible that we’d have spent the same amount of money and ended up as Everton.

 

No fan wants to be owned by such a regime and they’ve made smart decisions (to the annoyance of the Big 6). Would have been very interesting to read the narrative if we had become Everton. It could happen still, if it does then prepare for you get what you deserve.

 

Unless and until we suddenly become able to spend obscene amounts of money on the playing side to blow everyone else out the water I’m afraid I’ll celebrate any and every trophy without any feeling of any guilt. 
 

Hardly any fucker cared while Ashley whored us out as his advertising vehicle.  Has any journalist carried out a compare and contrast piece based purely on trying to being the best version of yourself with the resources available at the time? Ashley publicly stated he wouldn’t put another penny in and each time we were relegated he loaned money to us which added to the debt that ultimately added to the selling price.  
 

Remember everyone, as Rio suggested, we should suck it all up and buy the club ourselves or be grateful for what we have and don’t get above our station. Respect the Status Quo.

 

Ashley could have had this, said he wanted this and wouldn’t leave until he had this. Fast forward and he gets done for the way he handled KK, says there’s been threats to his family and will not put another penny into the club. 
 

I’ve now deviated from the article but I’d like to see a journalist do a piece on what could have been and the relative low cost it has taken to get to a first domestics trophy in 70 years last weekend, Champs League the season before last and 19th in the League without a win when Eddie took over.

 

I’m not going to let anyone take away the tears of joy I felt for my club last Sunday. I can separate my club from the current owners; I’ll not be told how I should feel. I’ll hopefully be still here once they’ve gone.

[Fak]

20 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

For me, if the owner has seemed enthusiastic about the club and given interviews about how they plan to run/run the club, they should be allowed to partake in celebrations when the club they own achieve success. 

 

I feel nobody can argue that Yasir hasn't been vocal about his desire to improve the club, win trophies and more. He's put "his" money where his mouth is, he's entitled to celebrate.

 

Club owners that choose to run their "property" from the shadows and aren't vocal/visible in their role(s), however? They can stay in the director's box when the team win something... like the below. The below is absolute bullshit, the guy's been at a match once since taking over the club:

 

 

 

 

Thought them two regularly attended?

[Kaizero]

16 minutes ago, Fak said:

Thought them two regularly attended?

 

I was mistaken. He's been to two matches  

 

"Sheik Mansour has been to two Manchester City games in his time as owner, in 2010 and 2023, the latter being the 2023 UEFA Champions League final"

[Kaizero]

23 minutes ago, Stifler said:

I don’t think it is, I think it’s context.

You want to report on the important matters, you want to hold people accountable, then actually fucking doing.

Having a go at football fans for the crime of being football fans is far from the point of their profession.

 

The article didn't have a go at fans at all, it only had a go at Yasir joining celebrations on the pitch.

[McDog]

1 minute ago, Kaizero said:

 

The article didn't have a go at fans at all, it only had a go at Yasir joining celebrations on the pitch.

 

And for that, they can go fuck themselves. Telling people who is and isn't allowed to celebrate? If you don't like the optics, close your fucking eyes.

[Kaizero]

1 minute ago, McDog said:

And for that, they can go fuck themselves. Telling people who is and isn't allowed to celebrate? If you don't like the optics, close your fucking eyes.

 

Essentially, it was more about directors as a whole not being allowed (in the journalist's eyes) to partake in celebrations. Saying NUFC fans would be of the same opinion if we'd have still been owned by Ashley and he made his way onto the pitch to celebrate. It's why my original response went on about my thoughts on owners celebrating.

 

Then went on to point out that in this case, it was "worse" than just a "normal" owner joining on-field celebrations, as he represented the Saudi government and so on. 

 

 

Edited Sunday at 20:06 by Kaizero

[McDog]

4 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

Essentially, it was more about directors as a whole not being allowed (in the journalist's eyes) to partake in celebrations. Saying NUFC fans would be of the same opinion if we'd have still been owned by Ashley and he made his way onto the pitch to celebrate. It's why my original response went on about my thoughts on owners celebrating.

 

Then went on to point out that in this case, it was "worse" than just a "normal" owner joining on-field celebrations, as he represented the Saudi government and so on. 

 

 

 

 

 

I didn't read the article as I canceled my subscription but why on earth would owners not be allowed to celebrate? Maybe that's somehow an English cultural thing looking down on that. If YOU owned the team would you just get up and leave after the cup was won? That's insane to me.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 20:10 by McDog

[Maggies]

36 minutes ago, NE27 said:

Is it wrong that him quickly doing a trophy lift didn't bother me in the slightest?

 

Didn't feel he was front and center of it all, in fact I'd say Amanda and mehrdad got more coverage beyond getting hold of the trophy.

Not wrong at all, in my opinion.

 

I loudly cheered when he lifted the cup at Wembley. He’s a key part of our success.

[et tu brute]

1 minute ago, Fak said:

Thought them two regularly attended?

Mansour if I'm right has only been to a home

game fir the very first game after the takeover (if he had been to another game it's only one more, as it's mentioned regularly on media coverage. Don't know about away games though.

 

As for our chairman, I don't see the problem with him going on the pitch to celebrate with the team. Have a look at Burn when he picks up his man of the match trophy, he looks up sees the chairman and is straight over. The next shot is of Burn, Trippier and Pope, with the chairman and hugging him. 2 of those are main players in the leadership group, which suggests to me that they know how committed the chairman is to the club. It is the first trophy since the PIF ownership, so of course he should be able to celebrate with the players and the fans on the pitch if he wants. If people have problems with that then that's up to them. All I know is without that ownership change, with the majority being made up by pIF, then none of us would have finally in our lifetime, had a major honour to celebrate. In fact the likelihood is, that we would be somewhere in the Championship, with a bleak future for a sustained period. 

[tgarve]

3 minutes ago, Maggies said:

Not wrong at all, in my opinion.

 

I loudly cheered when he lifted the cup at Wembley. He’s a key part of our success.

Consider yourself washed

[Hovagod]

4 minutes ago, Maggies said:

Not wrong at all, in my opinion.

 

I loudly cheered when he lifted the cup at Wembley. He’s a key part of our success.

He’s also a complete cunt though, which is the issue. 

[McDog]

1 minute ago, tgarve said:

Consider yourself washed

 

 

Better than to be pissed on I guess.

[Sima]

Got to admit it didn’t sit quite right with me like.  
 

Same as when Leicester owners were on the pitch lifting the trophy alongside parading that big picture of Alan Barnes.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 20:29 by Sima

[The Prophet]

It's Yasir's perogative if he wants to get involved in the celebrations, but it is quite unusual for an owner to do so and even at the time seemed quite sportswashy, for want of a better word. 

 

I was as overjoyed as anyone to lift the cup and didn't ruin my experience as a fan, but what he was doing did seem quite blatant.

 

 

Edited Sunday at 20:36 by The Prophet

[Whitley mag]

Sure I’ve seen Fenway lauding it on the pitch after Liverpool won a trophy.

 

Hopefully we see Yasir on the pitch a few more times over the next few years.

[Kaizero]

32 minutes ago, McDog said:

I didn't read the article as I canceled my subscription but why on earth would owners not be allowed to celebrate? Maybe that's somehow an English cultural thing looking down on that. If YOU owned the team would you just get up and leave after the cup was won? That's insane to me.

 

See my original response for my take on owners joining celebrations:

 

1 hour ago, Kaizero said:

For me, if the owner has seemed enthusiastic about the club and given interviews about how they plan to run/run the club, they should be allowed to partake in celebrations when the club they own achieve success. 

 

I feel nobody can argue that Yasir hasn't been vocal about his desire to improve the club, win trophies and more. He's put "his" money where his mouth is, he's entitled to celebrate.

 

Club owners that choose to run their "property" from the shadows and aren't vocal/visible in their role(s), however? They can stay in the director's box when the team win something... like the below. The below is absolute bullshit, the guy's been at a match once since taking over the club:

 

 

 

[Kaizero]

33 minutes ago, McDog said:

I didn't read the article as I canceled my subscription but why on earth would owners not be allowed to celebrate? Maybe that's somehow an English cultural thing looking down on that. If YOU owned the team would you just get up and leave after the cup was won? That's insane to me.

 

Also, just FWIW, I only have an active subscription to The Athletic because it's an included "perk" in my Revolut Ultra subscription. Wouldn't have it if not  

[McDog]

38 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

Also, just FWIW, I only have an active subscription to The Athletic because it's an included "perk" in my Revolut Ultra subscription. Wouldn't have it if not  

 

 

I wasn't calling you out, just find the entire premise in the article daft.