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

[Darth Crooks]

A Saudi Prince is a different prospect to the crown Prince of the country and the sovereign wealth fund mind. I agree there’s a significant element of the ‘big 6’ bristling but my admittedly limited understanding of ‘Prince’ in Saudi terms is more akin to the landed gentry rather than a royal family and influence as we have it. To bring it back from that tangent - I agree on the deflection from corruption aspect/broken game factor and critique of the discourse and some of the intentions of the most vocal or notorious critics.
 

I find that criticism a bit of deflection from the issue itself and looking forward there’s going to be a point where much like the Chelsea Russian oligarch situation, we may have a difference of policy as a nation as the world (including KSA) diversifies away from reliance on ME oil and traditional foreign policy alliances are less significant as a result and then the vacuum left by that brings other issues to the fore.

 

This links to wider geopolitics in the region including the role of alliances with Russia, China and the increasing divides in the world. This is or course a mess and somewhat unpredictable.

 

Theres a widely held view that football and politics should be kept separate and I’ve made inferences to things that may not happen and are someway off if they do but it’s exactly the sort of significance foresight the Ashley era has ingrained into me. This is the biggest example of politics and football meeting you’ll ever see - our third kit is a Saudi national flag a season in. If you’re not concerned about the issues posed by the Chelsea example then I don’t think you are considering the full implications.

Ad hominem attacks of critics and intentions ignores the green and white elephant in the room that it’s not an ultimate good and a big example, if not the biggest of the problems with the beautiful game. We’ll be part of a super league proposal within a decade probably and where will our principles be then? I also don’t have any specific prejudice re Saudi Arabia beyond what the scale of this represents. I’d be the same of any other sovereign state. Not too thrilled France and China own lots of stake in our utilities for instance for similar reasons. Another point as to why this football/politics separation has been blown out of the water by this.
 

I realise this is all conjecture but for me it’s why my full throated support for NUFC hasn’t returned in the way it was when I was protesting Ashley and in the halcyon days of being a 1992’er.

 

(born in 86 - soz mackems ?)

 

We’ll see success and great days and players in the short-medium term and that for many is true priority. I also get that - people have so much strife, priority and bandwidth in their lives - it’s not always a case of ‘education’. I actually think quality of discourse is a far more constructive factor in these matters than ‘the need for education/information’. I think the fact there’s prominent space on this forum for it is a net good and people though fairly partisan on this by and large keep a healthy debate. One that more disingenuous critics don’t take the time to see or find.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 4, 2022 by Darth Crooks

[RUHRLYASLEEVESUP]

56 minutes ago, Darth Crooks said:

A Saudi Prince is a different prospect to the crown Prince of the country and the sovereign wealth fund mind. I agree there’s a significant element of the ‘big 6’ bristling but my admittedly limited understanding of ‘Prince’ in Saudi terms is more akin to the landed gentry rather than a royal family and influence as we have it. To bring it back from that tangent - I agree on the deflection from corruption aspect/broken game factor and critique of the discourse and some of the intentions of the most vocal or notorious critics.
 

I find that criticism a bit of deflection from the issue itself and looking forward there’s going to be a point where much like the Chelsea Russian oligarch situation, we may have a difference of policy as a nation as the world (including KSA) diversifies away from reliance on ME oil and traditional foreign policy alliances are less significant as a result and then the vacuum left by that brings other issues to the fore.

 

This links to wider geopolitics in the region including the role of alliances with Russia, China and the increasing divides in the world. This is or course a mess and somewhat unpredictable.

 

Theres a widely held view that football and politics should be kept separate and I’ve made inferences to things that may not happen and are someway off if they do but it’s exactly the sort of significance foresight the Ashley era has ingrained into me. This is the biggest example of politics and football meeting you’ll ever see - our third kit is a Saudi national flag a season in. If you’re not concerned about the issues posed by the Chelsea example then I don’t think you are considering the full implications.

Ad hominem attacks if critics and intentions ignores the green and white elephant in the room that it’s not an ultimate good and a big example, if not the biggest of the problems with the beautiful game. We’ll be part of a super league proposal within a decade probably and where will our principles be then? I also don’t have any specific prejudice re Saudi Arabia beyond what the scale of this represents. I’d be the same of any other sovereign state. Not too thrilled France and China own lots of stake in our utilities for instance for similar reasons. Another point as to why this football/politics separation has been blown out of the water by this.
 

I realise this is all conjecture but for me it’s why my full throated support for NUFC hasn’t returned in the way it was when I was protesting Ashley and in the halcyon days of being a 1992’er.

 

(born in 86 - soz mackems ?)

 

We’ll see success and great days and players in the short-medium term and that for many is true priority. I also get that - people have so much strife, priority and bandwidth in their lives - it’s not always a case of ‘education’. I actually think quality of discourse is a far more constructive factor in these matters than ‘the need for education/information’. I think the fact there’s prominent space on this forum for it is a net good and people though fairly partisan on this by and large keep a healthy debate. One that more disingenuous critics don’t take the time to see or find.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We are top 6 & the hitherto unchallenged big 6 know that 

[arnonel]

Has anyone ever actually seen the list of PIF holdings? 

 

Its really staggering. To list a few: Starbucks, Uber, Facebook, Bank of America, Game companies such as EA, Capcom etc

 

Looking forward to people boycouting Fifa 23

[Chris_R]

58 minutes ago, Darth Crooks said:

A Saudi Prince is a different prospect to the crown Prince of the country and the sovereign wealth fund mind.

 

Where do you think the Saudi Prince got his money from?

 

It's only different in scale, and perhaps more importantly in impact to the supporters of other clubs. Ultimately hardly anybody cares about any takeover provided it doesn't negatively impact their own clubs' finishing position.

 

See how little uproar there's been about them "sportswashing" by having a Saudi Grand Prix - A few noises were made, but ultimately nobody really cared because nobody's "team" was negatively impacted even though the intent - to sportswash their country's reputation - is identical to their reason for taking over at Newcastle. So why the comparative silence? Same with boxing fights being held there, a little noise but nothing major. Same reason.

 

The overwhelming amount of noise is just fear that their team will be "unfairly" pushed down a peg, maybe out of the CL places or maybe out of the league. Supporters of teams we cannot affect - Championship and down (excepting the mackems because they're terrified of seeing us win stuff) don't really care to anywhere near the same extent. If there was equal uproar from the same people about all Saudi sportswashing projects, then fair enough, I could take it seriously. But it's targetted mainly - often exclusively - at us and there's a very good reason for that, and it has very little to do with human rights concerns. And because that targetted criticism is so provably disingenuous, it should be treat with a certain level of contempt.

 

This doesn't mean us being taken over by the Saudis is good. It isn't, on many levels. I'm very clear that I'd far rather have benevolent owners IF everything was fair across the league. But given the ownership models at every other "competitive" club at the top end of the league, this is the only way I'll ever get to see Newcastle challenge for anything, so bring it on. I welcome it, openly, for pure football reasons. I'm 45 now and in over 30 years of going to matches I have seen us win the square root of fuck all. Meanwhile, many other clubs have been bankrolled by foreign investment and have pulled clear of us. Now they want to pull the ladder up and keep their little club just for themselves. Fuck them. I want to see us lift a trophy or two. I want to enjoy those same good feelings they've had. I'm sick of being told we don't deserve it. That we're nothing. That existing in the same league, fighting for scraps from their table should be enough, and that I should be grateful for that.

 

On a different note, I also have a hope on some level that the sportswashing works both ways. Ultimately, if we shun states and make them pariahs they can just do whatever they want behind closed doors a la North Korea, China and Russia. But if Saudi Arabia owning Newcastle means they think twice next time they want to do something abhorrent, like chop up a journalist or behead someone for being gay, then maybe some good can come of it. If they know that these actions will be blown all over the press because of their ownership of Newcastle, or that it might even ultimately jeopardise that ownership, then they might moderate their actions somewhat and that is surely a good thing. Those that think this is a pipe dream should remember that the Saudis paid £1bn to their mortal enemies Qatar to settle the piracy dispute, just so they can push this takeover through. They want it to be a success, and they're willing to go to great lengths to make and protect that investment. They'll absolutely want to behave themselves going forward and keep their noses clean.

 

Also, by exposing the Saudi populace to our culture and way of life, you can in a small way start to make them a little more liberal. As someone who has been to Saudi 10 times for work, often for over a month at a time over the last 10 years, I've seen a gradual liberalisation there. It's come on so much from how it was back in 2012 and I hope that continues. Maybe in a small way, ownership of our club can help accelerate that.

 

Ultimately though my fifth paragraph is the main one for me. If we're not going to be allowed to compete "fairly", I'm more than happy for us to be bankrolled. I'm not a politician, I'm a football fan. I'll judge the owners of my football club on how they run that football club, not on what else they do. That's for people in those fields to look at. And if the government are happy to work with those owners, I don't see why I should lose a single moment's sleep over them running my football club.

[Darth Crooks]

I guess people don’t hold the same regional and heritage ties in a sport like the Grand Prix. There’s a very apparent set of hypocrisies at play which is fine to point out  and is valid.- but ultimately doesn’t address any part of that issues. What can be done about is beyond fans but I don’t subscribe to the view of I can’t change it so why bother worrying. Systemically it’s a problem down the line and we’re now the apex of it.

[Chris_R]

Ultimately, fans of other clubs want Newcastle fans to be more angry about the ownership of Newcastle than they themselves are willing to be about the Saudi Grand Prix or Saudi boxing fights.

 

Because ultimately it's not about concerns over sportswashing at all, it's just about knowing there's nothing they can do over our ownership and likely future investment and so they're wanting us to do what they can't: To force our owners out, to shoot ourselves in the foot so they can pull the ladder up again, and so that we can go back to where they think we "belong".

 

When we refuse to do this, they get angry. I get it. I've been angry at every "suger daddy" takeover in the league since Jack Walker. But let's recognise their anger for what it is and dismiss it accordingly.

 

 

Edited November 4, 2022 by Chris_R

[St. Maximin]

2 hours ago, arnonel said:

Has anyone ever actually seen the list of PIF holdings? 

 

Its really staggering. To list a few: Starbucks, Uber, Facebook, Bank of America, Game companies such as EA, Capcom etc

 

Looking forward to people boycouting Fifa 23

An argument I've seen is they don't control the majority of those companies like with NUFC. The flip side is they are much bigger and therefore far more Saudi money has gone into them. Ultimately people can choose their position and what they feel happy with or not and I'm fine with that. More an issue when people start telling people what to think or try to influence a takeover to be blocked due to 'sportswashing'. It's fine to be concerned about that, but it's a subjective take on a situation rather than a legal issue and therefore not a reason to prevent a business transaction.

[Tiresias]

But buying a football club should be more than a 'business transaction'. So many clubs are bought and looted they are community assets not pure businesses. They are built on community loyality and tradition and so have been exploited. The reasons I have outlined a few posts back. The idea that buying it is purely a legal issue and therefore noone should be able to stop it is poor in my opinion. 

 

They have invested far and wide because partially if they are embedded in western economies it is harder for them to be sanctioned, partially I am sure it is to make money somewhere, partially to exert some influence on businesses they have invested in. 

 

I have no problem with anyone not being concerned about the sportwashing, as outlined above, it's not a business one can expect people to just stop going to, it is embedded in the fabric of peoples lives too much. If the argument from our fans though is they're not sportswashing though I would challenge that because that implies somewhat that you would have a problem with it if it is sportwashing, and i don't really know what definition of sportswashing there is apart from what is going on with our club. 

 

I would argue perfectly reasonable to also argue it is sportswashing but it doesn't work, all it does is keep the conversation about saudi araba having issues in their governance in the public sphere. I am not sure where i stand on that but I am resolved if I am going to enjoy the benefits to try and publically not be taken in by them. 

[TRon]

1 hour ago, Chris_R said:

Ultimately, fans of other clubs want Newcastle fans to be more angry about the ownership of Newcastle than they themselves are willing to be about the Saudi Grand Prix or Saudi boxing fights.

 

Because ultimately it's not about concerns over sportswashing at all, it's just about knowing there's nothing they can do over our ownership and likely future investment and so they're wanting us to do what they can't: To force our owners out, to shoot ourselves in the foot so they can pull the ladder up again, and so that we can go back to where they think we "belong".

 

When we refuse to do this, they get angry. I get it. I've been angry at every "suger daddy" takeover in the league since Jack Walker. But let's recognise their anger for what it is and dismiss it accordingly.

 

 

 

 

You also know that 90% of fans wish their own clubs had been bought by PIF instead of Newcastle. I'm sure there would be a very small percentage of them who would be outraged enough to stop supporting the club as well, but money calls the shots, and it has done since Qatari and Russian money snatched the PL glory over the last 20 years.

[St. Maximin]

9 minutes ago, Tiresias said:

But buying a football club should be more than a 'business transaction'. So many clubs are bought and looted they are community assets not pure businesses. They are built on community loyality and tradition and so have been exploited. The reasons I have outlined a few posts back. The idea that buying it is purely a legal issue and therefore noone should be able to stop it is poor in my opinion. 

 

They have invested far and wide because partially if they are embedded in western economies it is harder for them to be sanctioned, partially I am sure it is to make money somewhere, partially to exert some influence on businesses they have invested in. 

 

I have no problem with anyone not being concerned about the sportwashing, as outlined above, it's not a business one can expect people to just stop going to, it is embedded in the fabric of peoples lives too much. If the argument from our fans though is they're not sportswashing though I would challenge that because that implies somewhat that you would have a problem with it if it is sportwashing, and i don't really know what definition of sportswashing there is apart from what is going on with our club. 

 

I would argue perfectly reasonable to also argue it is sportswashing but it doesn't work, all it does is keep the conversation about saudi araba having issues in their governance in the public sphere. I am not sure where i stand on that but I am resolved if I am going to enjoy the benefits to try and publically not be taken in by them. 

Fair, all good points, though personally I don't really hear much about sanctions avoidance from the critics. I mostly hear about how sportwashing improves a reputation by deflecting negative attention, with the idea countries can commit atrocities behind the front of a football club, which to me doesn't really make sense due to the added media exposure. I can understand the issue of sanctions avoidance (compared to Russia, for example, who are not our allies), though as has been mentioned the greater media exposure and economic connections could help show they cannot continue to behave as they do and get away with it.

[Disco]

 

[Miggys First Goal]

Hell...

[Chapo]

Our owners man 

[LiquidAK]

Ugh, grim.

[AJ9]

55 minutes ago, Disco said:

 

Horrid

[Anon]

Love supporting us these days, but there will always be an asterisk next to any success we have (in my mind).

[Tiresias]

[OverThere]

On 06/11/2022 at 11:52, Disco said:

 

WTF

[HaydnNUFC]

[Stifler]

PIF are wanting to use Trumps golf courses for the LIV tour. Of course they cost up to him, for what it’s worth our chairman also follows Biden on Twitter and no doubt would be open to more dialog with Biden if he were to accept it.

 

Of course none of this means fuck all. I don my condone nor endorse Trump, just as much as anything else. I support NUFC.

[gbandit]

It’s vile man, no need to say anything other than that. Trump is the biggest dickhead on the planet alongside Putin, Bolsonaro etc

[David Edgar]

Quote

Section of the Newcastle fans singing "1-0 to the Saudi boys."

 

Wankers.

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, David Edgar said:

 

Wankers.

 

Thought I heard that. Shite, that.

[Guest]

 

 

Hmm.

 

[jack j]

Fucking bollocks

Was Chelsea fans singing it

Same as palace on Wednesday no noise from the Saudi boys from them