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

[Shadow Puppets]

As much as I can't stand the guy, it's hard to disagree with anything Jordan says here: 

 

[Rafalove]

1 hour ago, The Prophet said:

 

We need journos like Delaney to keep banging the drum when it comes sportswashing and the like, but fuck me he's a hypocrite.

 

How is he a hypocrite? Genuine question.

[The Prophet]

29 minutes ago, Rafalove said:

 

How is he a hypocrite? Genuine question.

 

For a kick off, He's employed by the independent who is 70% owned by Evgeny Levedev (Russian) and Muhammed Abuljadaye (Saudi). 

 

On top of that he's more or less Roman a free pass, up until the Ukraine invasion and was perfectly happy to attend Russia during the 2018 World Cup coverage.

 

I think it's really important journalist's like him continue to talk about the likes of Saudi and Qatar in football, but his constant attacks on fans and generally sneering tone toward them is really misguided and quite irritating.

 

All in all I think the work he does is really important and I have no issues with him questioning our ownership, I just don't like the bloke.

 

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by The Prophet

[triggs]

Tbf prior to the last few months I'm not sure Abramovich or Russia were worthy of as much criticism as UAE/Saudi Arabia. Obviously how he got his money was always known to be dodgy and his links to Putin were known but Putin's reputation basically went to Hitler levels overnight but it wasn't always *that* bad

[Yassassin]

2 minutes ago, triggs said:

Tbf prior to the last few months I'm not sure Abramovich or Russia were worthy of as much criticism as UAE/Saudi Arabia. Obviously how he got his money was always known to be dodgy and his links to Putin were known but Putin's reputation basically went to Hitler levels overnight but it wasn't always *that* bad

He went not long after the Salisbury poisonings and the shooting down of MH17 during the continuing suppression of human rights and in particular political opposition by the Putin regime; he is a top notch hypocrite but England actually played the tournament and many of his arguments are correct

[Wullie]

This is one of the main reasons I was so uncomfortable about the takeover, the reputation of the club being tied to anything that happens with Saudi.

  

On 19/04/2020 at 22:40, Wullie said:

It's hard to say where the line is without knowing what the Saudis do politically in future. Like, what is going to happen with their war in Yemen? Our club's good name is always going to be tied to whatever they're up to.

 

There's a remarkable amount of wanting to have your cake and eat it going on at the minute. We decided that taking the blood money was worth it to get rid of Ashley but we also want nobody to mention it? It's downright weird. If you didn't want to read that "the owners of Newcastle United executed 81 people over the weekend" in the paper, then the thing to do was oppose the takeover, not moan about journalists commenting on it. If you were enthusiastically waving your Saudi flag and buzzing about the whole thing, it's no good whinging about it, this is the inevitable price you agreed to pay for that.

[Wullie]

I'm not sure attending an event as a journalist counts as tacit support, not unless Clive Myrie is a big supporter of the war in Ukraine.

[Yassassin]

Just now, Wullie said:

I'm not sure attending an event as a journalist counts as tacit support, not unless Clive Myrie is a big supporter of the war in Ukraine.

You see the war as an ‘event’? Interesting take

[Wullie]

2 minutes ago, Yassassin said:

You see the war as an ‘event’? Interesting take

 

Using the definition of the word 'event', yes it's an event. 

[Kid Icarus]

19 minutes ago, triggs said:

Tbf prior to the last few months I'm not sure Abramovich or Russia were worthy of as much criticism as UAE/Saudi Arabia. Obviously how he got his money was always known to be dodgy and his links to Putin were known but Putin's reputation basically went to Hitler levels overnight but it wasn't always *that* bad

 

That's debateable like, Russia were up to much of the same as the Saudi's were, just in more of a Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy way that people aren't as repulsed by. 

[Kid Icarus]

16 minutes ago, Wullie said:

I'm not sure attending an event as a journalist counts as tacit support, not unless Clive Myrie is a big supporter of the war in Ukraine.

 

I think it depends. If they're there making the case for and reporting on sportswashing, that's a completely different story to them being there doing match reports and essentially participating in it.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

24 minutes ago, Wullie said:

I'm not sure attending an event as a journalist counts as tacit support, not unless Clive Myrie is a big supporter of the war in Ukraine.

I get your point but that’s a terrible analogy

[Wullie]

It's actually not, although there's a degree of hyperbole obviously. They're both members of the press, it's Delaney's job to cover big football events wherever they happen to take place. This is not unique to him, all football journalists who comment on us/City/Chelsea get this accusation about the World Cup, I've seen it.

 

The accusation of "oh you are happy to go to the World Cup" is to insinuate that being a football journalist is akin to basically a corporate knees-up, which it's not, any more than a journalist who goes to cover a G7 summit and gets put up in a nice hotel is on a jolly. 

[Wullie]

13 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

I think it depends. If they're there making the case for and reporting on sportswashing, that's a completely different story to them being there doing match reports and essentially participating in it.

 

But it'll only be writers in the former category who get accused of hypocrisy for doing exactly what you say they're entitled to do, and should be doing.

 

It's not the guy giving marks out of ten in The Sun that'll get stick.

[Kid Icarus]

2 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

But it'll only be writers in the former category who get accused of hypocrisy for doing exactly what you say they're entitled to do, and should be doing.

 

It's not the guy giving marks out of ten in The Sun that'll get stick.

 

I meant if they're the same person doing both (e.g. Delaney doing match reports) not separate people doing one and not the other. 

 

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by Kid Icarus

[AJ9]

Hmmm. Except sports journalism is entirely complicit in sportswashing and none of them have the self-awareness to really acknowledge that. You buy a sport, you buy fans, you do wonderful things in a sport that reporters then write or broadcast about. On the same pages there will be some article about how bad it is. I’m not saying they should stop reporting, I just think that they need to acknowledge that they are as complicit in this (if not more so) than the fans of the club. They could for instance take an ethical stance and refuse to report on us, or elevate the reporting of clubs/sports that do not have an association to these regimes, but they don’t. 
 

Edit - Ronay actually acknowledged this recently in an article about Russia and football, to his credit.

 

Second edit - see the athletic as an example. Loads of articles about human rights, the plight of LGBTQ community in SA, and then more recent articles about how great Bruno is, positive interviews with owners and Eddie Howe. All of this bought by the same money.

 

 

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by AJ9

[The Merse]

34 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

That's debateable like, Russia were up to much of the same as the Saudi's were, just in more of a Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy way that people aren't as repulsed by. 

Like when they annexed Crimea and nothing was said about it when he has been inextricably linked for decades

[Wullie]

13 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

I meant if they're the same person doing both (e.g. Delaney doing match reports) not separate people doing one and not the other. 

 

But what newspaper is going to send a football journalist to a football tournament who refuses to do match reports? If e.g. Jonathan Wilson says "Yeah I'll go but I'll only send back copy about how this tournament shouldn't be going ahead and nothing about Germany's tactics against Italy, I'm not doing both", the Guardian (or any other paper other than the FT) are just going to go "uhh ok, we'll just send someone else then who will just write match reports" as ultimately that's what most people will want to read. 

 

I don't think it's the place of the press to be campaigning activists, and reporting on the sport as well as the wider issues at the same time is perfectly justifiable and not in the least bit hypocritical imo.

[Kid Icarus]

Just now, Wullie said:

 

But what newspaper is going to send a football journalist to a football tournament who refuses to do match reports? If e.g. Jonathan Wilson says "Yeah I'll go but I'll only send back copy about how this tournament shouldn't be going ahead and nothing about Germany's tactics against Italy, I'm not doing both", the Guardian are just going to go "uhh ok, we'll just send someone else then who will just write match reports" as ultimately that's what most people will want to read.

 

I don't think it's the place of the press to be campaigning activists, and reporting on the sport as well as the wider issues at the same time is perfectly justifiable and not in the least bit hypocritical imo.

 

If it's something they specialise in I don't mind if they are personally, but it clearly sticks in people's throats when some are both condemners and participants. 

 

You were talking about having our cake and eating it earlier, this is no different imo. If a journalist wants to both criticise the pawns in sportswashing and participate in it as pawns themselves - citing whatever sacrifice they're unwilling to make as their valid reason for participating in it - they're going to be just as open to finger pointing, especially from those they've criticised. 

 

'well it'll just be someone else that goes to Russia if it's not me' isn't really any different to 'well if it's not Newcastle that's taken over, it'll just be some other club'

[The Butcher]

I'm delighted Ashley's gone and I'm comfortable with Saudi ownership. 

 

 

[Guest HTT II]

42 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

But what newspaper is going to send a football journalist to a football tournament who refuses to do match reports? If e.g. Jonathan Wilson says "Yeah I'll go but I'll only send back copy about how this tournament shouldn't be going ahead and nothing about Germany's tactics against Italy, I'm not doing both", the Guardian (or any other paper other than the FT) are just going to go "uhh ok, we'll just send someone else then who will just write match reports" as ultimately that's what most people will want to read. 

 

I don't think it's the place of the press to be campaigning activists, and reporting on the sport as well as the wider issues at the same time is perfectly justifiable and not in the least bit hypocritical imo.

Can they not do both? They are there to report on Chelsea vs NUFC, but then ask our manager about politics, war, human rights, atrocities etc. Most journos and reporters are vile vultures, not one sense of decency among almost all of them, especially in sport. They can all go and fuck off. Ask questions of fans, but not of politicians? Well I’m a sports journo… then stick to the fucking name of the game! Or report on politics, or better off do both and of you happen to work for a company owned by a oligarch or with questionable investment from others, then condemn them and leave your position, or shut the fuck up!

 

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by HTT II

[Khalidao]

3 hours ago, The Prophet said:

 

We need journos like Delaney to keep banging the drum when it comes sportswashing and the like, but fuck me he's a hypocrite.

 

A flag of UK ally in a UK football stadium?

 

 

[Wullie]

20 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

If it's something they specialise in I don't mind if they are personally, but it clearly sticks in people's throats when some are both condemners and participants. 

 

You were talking about having our cake and eating it earlier, this is no different imo. If a journalist wants to both criticise the pawns in sportswashing and participate in it as pawns themselves - citing whatever sacrifice they're unwilling to make as their valid reason for participating in it - they're going to be just as open to finger pointing, especially from those they've criticised. 

 

'well it'll just be someone else that goes to Russia if it's not me' isn't really any different to 'well if it's not Newcastle that's taken over, it'll just be some other club'

 

But you're comparing two different cohorts of each there I think.

 

A journalist who goes to the WC, covers the football but also writes critical pieces about the hosts etc,

 

You're comparing that example with a football fan, in my post from earlier, who wants the Saudi money but won't entertain any criticism of them and in fact will actively go to bat for them. That's not a reasonable comparison with the kinds of journalists I mentioned.

[Wullie]

8 minutes ago, HTT II said:

Can they not do both? They are there to report on Chelsea vs NUFC, but then ask our manager about politics, war, human rights, atrocities etc. Most journos and reporters are vile vultures, not one sense of decency among almost all of them, especially in sport. They can all go and fuck off. Ask questions of fans, but not of politicians? Well I’m a sports journo… the. Stick to the fucking game!

 

The bit in bold is just weird, and silly. 

 

I'd love to know how a football journalist reports on Chelsea at the moment without mentioning politics. This is what I'm on about. If you're going to celebrate buying football success with money obtained through spurious political machinations, or waging war, or whatever, that's fine. But you can't complain when people ask questions! A is the price you pay for B.

 

If we don't want this in football, don't allow politicians/nation states to buy football clubs in the first place.

[Guest HTT II]

3 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

The bit in bold is just weird, and silly. 

 

I'd love to know how a football journalist reports on Chelsea at the moment without mentioning politics. This is what I'm on about. If you're going to celebrating buy football success with money obtained through spurious political machinations, or waging war, or whatever, that's fine. But you can't complain when people ask questions! A is the price you pay for B.

 

If we don't want this in football, don't allow politicians/nation states to buy football clubs in the first place.

I’m just ranting to be honest because I find a whole load of hypocrisy in most of the reporting, sportingly and politically from the other side of the press/media. For the record, I’m happy for them or anyone to ask questions, but ask the real powers that be and not some lame duck manager or some average fan who just wants to see their team play, win and has zero say on who comes and buys their club, and your last paragraph, exactly, I’d be over the moon if that happened across the board, including our own club. 

 

 

Edited March 16, 2022 by HTT II