The "delighted Ashley has gone, but uncomfortable with Saudi ownership" thread

[Guest HTT II]

Just now, Joey Linton said:

Our fanbase shouldn't be parading themselves around in tea towels and waving Saudi flags when we score. That would make the "zero control over" argument easier to make. 

I agree, although I’ve stated in the past RE this issue, I don’t think fans wearing such attire are being racist or culturally inappropriate, hopefully once the novelty wears off, the attire will come off. It’s going to be tough for the fanbase for a good few months where we will be the target of a lot of unjustified attacks, personal bias and abuse all because of our club being owned by some Saudis…

[Joey Linton]

2 minutes ago, HTT II said:

I agree, although I’ve stated in the past RE this issue, I don’t think fans wearing such attire are being racist or culturally inappropriate, hopefully once the novelty wears off, the attire will come off. It’s going to be tough for the fanbase for a good few months where we will be the target of a lot of unjustified attacks, personal bias and abuse all because of our club being owned by some Saudis…

Not racist or culturally inappropriate, just makes the separation issue (see what i did there) between the owners and the fanbase harder to argue. 

[Guest HTT II]

3 minutes ago, Joey Linton said:

Not racist or culturally inappropriate, just makes the separation issue (see what i did there) between the owners and the fanbase harder to argue. 

Oh I agree, but it’s unfair to condemn fans as being fully behind SA’s atrocities because some dress up in SA attire or worse, because we cheer on our team still, which is what’s happening and will happen, even if fans stop wearing stuff and waving SA flags. That’s the biggest downside to this whole takeover and we as fans need to rise above it, not get angered at some Palace banner and report it to the Police, engage in the debate and do whatever we can to also shine a light on their atrocities while somehow being dignified in our support of OUR club. It’s going to be very tough for us, on us and our club sadly.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by HTT II

[Ben]

 

[Smal]

It’s not hypocrisy at all ffs.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

The separation argument was just a corrupt cover for the pressure the PL was coming from Qatar and the bigger clubs anyway, no?
 

It was never the actual reason for stopping the takeover. 

[Smal]

We really need to stop trying to find criticisms for people pointing out human rights abuses, or their dead husband, or war crimes. It’s a really fucking bad look and is absolutely evidence of successful sportswashing.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, Smal said:

We really need to stop trying to find criticisms for people pointing out human rights abuses, or their dead husband, or war crimes. It’s a really fucking bad look and is absolutely evidence of successful sportswashing.

Agree in general, but I’m sure a lot of the time it’s just a way to slag off rival fans, and they actually don’t care about the issues they’re highlighting. 

 

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by AyeDubbleYoo

[Guest HTT II]

2 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Agree in general, but I’m sure a lot of the time it’s just a way to slag off rival fans, and they actually don’t care about the issues they’re highlighting. 

 

 

 

It’s both, but mainly the latter!

[Mattoon]

I agree with the sentiment, it's not acceptable some of the practices that happen in SA. My issue is with the political grandstanding of your average fan, full blown virtue signalling borne of jealousy. Most of them don't care what happens outside their own front door, it's the hypocrisy that irks me, not the legitimate concerns of sportswashing.

 

Most of this will have vanished by next season, those that are still vocal should be listened to at that point. Right now, its just noise and needs to be ignored, to try and enter into discourse just makes our fans look complicit.

[Smal]

6 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Agree in general, but I’m sure a lot of the time it’s just a way to slag off rival fans, and they actually don’t care about the issues they’re highlighting. 

 

 

 

There will definitely be an element of that, but calling Crystal Palace fans making a stand against Saudi Arabian state ownership hypocritical just because someone involved in their club’s ownership is also bad (in a significantly lesser way) is simply ridiculous.

 

Accept the criticisms because they’re true, valid and important. The motivation behind them is not at all important. Once you start trying to pick holes in it you’re lost.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by Smal

[Joey Linton]

17 minutes ago, Ben said:

 

Had hoped Keith might disappear into the background again. More fool me. 

[Mattoon]

5 minutes ago, Smal said:

There will definitely be an element of that, but calling Crystal Palace fans making a stand against Saudi Arabian state ownership hypocritical just because someone involved in their club’s ownership is also bad (in a significantly lesser way) is simply ridiculous.

 

Accept the criticisms because they’re true. The motivation behind them is not at all important.

 

Unfortunately it's siege mentality at this point, as fans we've had 18 months of fighting alone against what we perceived to be an injustice from the PL. This fight has continued after the takeover in an "us against the world" scenario, which makes your average fan want to defend their CLUB. Therein lies the issue as the club and the issues at hand aren't mutually exclusive but feel like the same thing, people feel targeted and are defending that which they would not normally.

 

Whataboutism is an easy way for people to justify their defence of their club as an entity.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by Mattoon

[1964]

4 minutes ago, Mattoon said:

I agree with the sentiment, it's not acceptable some of the practices that happen in SA. My issue is with the political grandstanding of your average fan, full blown virtue signalling borne of jealousy. Most of them don't care what happens outside their own front door, it's the hypocrisy that irks me, not the legitimate concerns of sportswashing.

 

Most of this will have vanished by next season, those that are still vocal should be listened to at that point. Right now, its just noise and needs to be ignored, to try and enter into discourse just makes our fans look complicit.

I'm pretty confident that much of the outrage coming from rival supporters will be their one and only example.

 

I doubt many have a history of speaking out against oppression, which says a lot.  I agree that just ignoring it and letting it ride out is the only option,  whataboutism does not work 

[Mattoon]

1 minute ago, 1964 said:

I'm pretty confident that much of the outrage coming from rival supporters will be their one and only example.

 

I doubt many have a history of speaking out against oppression, which says a lot.  I agree that just ignoring it and letting it ride out is the only option,  whataboutism does not work 

 

Totally agree and although I'm not defending it I can understand why some supporters are using whataboutism in defense of their club because they're conflating the attacks on Saudi ownership to attacks on NUFC.

[Slim]

No problems with this.

 

 

[Mattoon]

Just now, Slim said:

No problems with this.

 

 

 

The whataboutism is strong in this one.

[KaKa]

When other fans bring this stuff up to you guys personally, have you asked them what they would do if their club was sold to the Saudis? Just wondering what they are saying to this if any of you have asked?

[Whitley mag]

14 minutes ago, Smal said:

There will definitely be an element of that, but calling Crystal Palace fans making a stand against Saudi Arabian state ownership hypocritical just because someone involved in their club’s ownership is also bad (in a significantly lesser way) is simply ridiculous.

 

Accept the criticisms because they’re true, valid and important. The motivation behind them is not at all important. Once you start trying to pick holes in it you’re lost.

 

 

 

It’s not ridiculous they can protest all they like, but where fully entitled to point out the hypocrisy of it aswell.

 

The simple fact remains if we’d been taken over by a tyrant who had no money, would all these fans be so concerned ?

 

I’m sure you’ll tell me yes, but to the majority of the fan base it comes across as hypocrisy and faux outrage.

 

 

[triggs]

5 minutes ago, Slim said:

No problems with this.

 

 

Everyone's favourite journalist who supposedly has an agenda against Newcastle does

 

 

[Smal]

1 minute ago, Whitley mag said:

It’s not ridiculous they can protest all they like, but where fully entitled to point out the hypocrisy of it aswell.

 

The simple fact remains if we’d been taken over by a tyrant who had no money, would all these fans be so concerned ?

 

I’m sure you’ll tell me yes, but to the majority of the fan base it comes across as hypocrisy and faux outrage.

 

 

Who cares what the motivation behind their point is? The moral argument they are making is a) unequivocal and b) really important.

 

The motivations I would question are the Newcastle fans trying to pick holes in these arguments. Why are you fighting against it? Ultimately it’s because you want them to stop making these arguments which, in my view at least, is really wrong and unhelpful.

[Mattoon]

1 minute ago, Smal said:

Who cares what the motivation behind their point is? The moral argument they are making is a) unequivocal and b) really important.

 

The motivations I would question are the Newcastle fans trying to pick holes in these arguments. Why are you fighting against it? Ultimately it’s because you want them to stop making these arguments which, in my view at least, is really wrong and unhelpful.

 

I explained this on the previous page, to reiterate, I don't believe it's right, however, the claims being made feel insincere and supporters are bound to conflate custodianship with the club they support. Something they love is being attacked indirectly and the natural instinct is to defend that action. The average fan is not separating the issues. Its OK to not agree with it but understand where its coming from. The whole idea behind sportswashing is to conflate that love of something with what you're trying to hide and unfortunately, it works.

[Smal]

Just now, Mattoon said:

 

I explained this on the previous page, to reiterate, I don't believe it's right, however, the claims being made feel insincere and supporters are bound to conflate custodianship with the club they support. Something they love is being attacked indirectly and the natural instinct is to defend that action. The average fan is not separating the issues. Its OK to not agree with it but understand where its coming from. The whole idea behind sportswashing is to conflate that love of something with what you're trying to hide and unfortunately, it works.

I understand why. Still important to call it out though.

[Mattoon]

13 minutes ago, KaKa said:

When other fans bring this stuff up to you guys personally, have you asked them what they would do if their club was sold to the Saudis? Just wondering what they are saying to this if any of you have asked?

 

You won't get an honest answer KaKa, unfortunately the stock answer to that is they would protest and refuse to go to matches, etc... the proof is in the pudding and until something like this happens again with another club you won't see their truth.

[Klaus]

12 minutes ago, KaKa said:

When other fans bring this stuff up to you guys personally, have you asked them what they would do if their club was sold to the Saudis? Just wondering what they are saying to this if any of you have asked?

 

This is the key. The reality is that most fans would jump at the opportunity to become the richest club in the world.

 

In an ideal world, all clubs would have fan ownership (which will never happen), or we have a Geordie owner worth 320BN, but that person doesn't exist.