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

[Smal]

It's not just hosting any international fixture though is it. It's the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A state whose dictatorship regime commits war crimes and murders Yemeni schoolchildren, chops up journalists, executes LGBTQ people and imprisons any dissenting voices. 

 

They would be playing at SJP as a display and celebration of our club's links with that regime. 

[KaKa]

I really think you guys should have done more to resist the takeover and maybe held protests at the Premier League offices or something. It's clear you are not going to be able to separate their sporting ventures from their politics and culture.

[Kid Icarus]

16 minutes ago, KaKa said:

I really think you guys should have done more to resist the takeover and maybe held protests at the Premier League offices or something. It's clear you are not going to be able to separate their sporting ventures from their politics and culture.

 

All due respect, I was part of a group that couldn't talk the majority of the fanbase into protesting against Mike Ashley despite him being universally loathed. You'd have more joy selling garlic in Transylvania than protesting against this lot in Newcastle. 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[Dr.Spaceman]

31 minutes ago, Smal said:

It's not just hosting any international fixture though is it. It's the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A state whose dictatorship regime commits war crimes and murders Yemeni schoolchildren, chops up journalists, executes LGBTQ people and imprisons any dissenting voices. 

 

They would be playing at SJP as a display and celebration of our club's links with that regime. 

 

Like everyone knows this is the case, but what do people like you get out of repeating yourself like this?

 

Genuine question and I'm not trying to be a prick (for once), I have issues with it myself.

[Hovagod]

They’re using our kit and stadium exactly as they see fit, and they don’t need to justify anything because the fanbase are readily complicit in it all. (Seem to see hundreds of people around the place in last year’s Saudi kit.) I’m not talking mass protest (though I don’t see why not), but our lack of circumspection as a fanbase is it a bit bizarre, and the crying if and when we do get fucked over in the future is going to rightly draw contempt from the rest of the country. Meanwhile, we’re happily opting into a cup scheme that Man Utd fans were up in arms about a few years back. 

[Barnes23]

3 minutes ago, Smal said:

It's not just hosting any international fixture though is it. It's the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A state whose dictatorship regime commits war crimes and murders Yemeni schoolchildren, chops up journalists, executes LGBTQ people and imprisons any dissenting voices. 

 

They would be playing at SJP as a display and celebration of our club's links with that regime. 

The degree of separation between the actions of a regime and a national football team are vast, the degree of separation between all of that and NUFC as a club and Newcastle as a city is vaster still. Much of the debate surrounding our involvement with SA seem to operate on this assumption of complicity which seems to treat non-equivalent areas of life (sport, business, geopolitics, the internal politics of SA) as commensurable when they really aren't. 

 

 

 

 

[KaKa]

17 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

All due respect, I was part of a group that couldn't talk the majority of people into protesting against Mike Ashley who was universally loathed by the fanbase. You'd have more joy selling garlic in Transylvania than protesting against this lot in Newcastle. 

 

Yeah, that's the problem really. 

 

I think when people have an issue with this stuff they need to get out there en masse and make their voices heard about it. I think if enough of a fuss had been made by Newcastle fans against it, the takeover could have been thwarted.

 

However, I don't remember seeing anyone out there that were Newcastle fans really going against it, and so complaining about everything the ownership now does that is associated to their country just seems pointless.

 

Having said that, maybe even now if enough of a fuss is kicked up it could make an impact. If enough Newcastle fans really don't want the Saudis at their club they need to start a movement to get them out, and maybe they'll get their wish. I'm sure there are other clubs they would look at.

 

Then again the way they're hoovering up players for their league, maybe they'll just double down their focuses on that alone.

[RUHRLYASLEEVESUP]

Just now, Barnes23 said:

The degree of separation between the actions of a regime and a national football team are vast, the degree of separation between all of that and NUFC as a club and Newcastle as a city is vaster still. Much of the debate surrounding our involvement with SA seem to operate on this assumption of complicity which seems to treat non-equivalent areas of life (sport, business, geopolitics, the internal politics of SA) as commensurable when they really aren't. 

 

 

 

 

very well said, seems some people’s opinions matter more than others in they’re opinion

 

not one person on here agrees with civil or human rights abuse I wouldn’t of thought however the “inference” any fan / follower is in anyway complicit or agrees with any regime, dictatorship or other is just plain daft, you can debate til the cows come home but it won’t ever change a single thing in respect of this, we are where we are and from an entirely selfish point of view I’m delighted where we are as a team / club which is the only thing I’m concerned with.

[Smal]

17 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

All due respect, I was part of a group that couldn't talk the majority of the fanbase into protesting against Mike Ashley despite him being universally loathed. You'd have more joy selling garlic in Transylvania than protesting against this lot in Newcastle. 

 

 

 

I can think of no greater example of this being the case than United with Pride's welcoming statement. If even they wouldn't condemn the takeover then...

 

2 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

 

Like everyone knows this is the case, but what do people like you get out of repeating yourself like this?

 

Genuine question and I'm not trying to be a prick (for once), I have issues with it myself.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "people like you", which certainly makes it sound like a loaded question tbh , but if someone is likening it to any other international fixture as though there's no difference to, for example, Brazil playing at Arsenal's ground, then I thought they perhaps might need it spelling out again with emphasis. 

 

3 minutes ago, Barnes23 said:

The degree of separation between the actions of a regime and a national football team

 

Of course the Saudi football team have nothing to do with the actions of their state and nobody is suggesting such. But, you know, why else would their national team be playing at our ground if not because of the obvious links between the club and their state? If their state didn't own our football club the Saudi Arabia NT would not be playing at St James'.

[Dr.Spaceman]

23 minutes ago, Smal said:

I can think of no greater example of this being the case than United with Pride's welcoming statement. If even they wouldn't condemn the takeover then...

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "people like you", which certainly makes it sound like a loaded question tbh , but if someone is likening it to any other international fixture as though there's no difference to, for example, Brazil playing at Arsenal's ground, then I thought they perhaps might need it spelling out again with emphasis. 

 

 

Of course the Saudi football team have nothing to do with the actions of their state and nobody is suggesting such. But, you know, why else would their national team be playing at our ground if not because of the obvious links between the club and their state? If their state didn't own our football club the Saudi Arabia NT would not be playing at St James'.

 

Apologies, I meant boring twats who repeat themselves from their high horse.

 

Barnes23 knows that, and you know he knows that. So back to my question, what do you get out of repeating yourself like that?

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by Dr.Spaceman

[ExiledGeordie]

Holt will be all over this. Fwiw human rights should absolutely be reported on and acknowledged but the one sided bias from journos (E. holt) to fit their agenda is ridiculous. Nobody gave a shit about the region when Ashley was here and now apparently plenty of them are ready to stick the boot in now.

[Kid Icarus]

21 minutes ago, RUHRLYASLEEVESUP said:

very well said, seems some people’s opinions matter more than others in they’re opinion

 

not one person on here agrees with civil or human rights abuse I wouldn’t of thought however the “inference” any fan / follower is in anyway complicit or agrees with any regime, dictatorship or other is just plain daft, you can debate til the cows come home but it won’t ever change a single thing in respect of this, we are where we are and from an entirely selfish point of view I’m delighted where we are as a team / club which is the only thing I’m concerned with.

 

I'm not looking for an argument, but this is a very much sanitised version of what's happened in the last couple of years imo.

 

I totally agree with the majority view being the bit that you've put in bold, but what's missing there imo is just how powerful that is in the fanbase and how far that can be taken. Imo it is the most brilliant example of how powerful material interests are, where in this case the material interest of the football club people support is driving them to do things like openly abuse Jamal Khashoggi's partner or Amnesty International. I'm sure the vast majority will say that they don't want to defend the regime, dictatorship etc as you say, but when some of the same people then go and act like that, it sure does either look like that's what they're doing, or that they've got their priorities all wrong. 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[Smal]

13 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

 

Apologies, I meant boring twats who repeat themselves from their high horse.

 

Rocker knows that, and you know he knows that. So back to my question, what do you get out of repeating yourself like that?

I don't get anything from it. Apologies if I've upset you. 

[arnonel]

For the 1000000th time

 

Wish people would stop being so binary

 

You can and should hate the atrocities in Saudi

You can and should LOVE the investment in the club and city

 

You dont have to pick only 1

[Kid Icarus]

2 minutes ago, arnonel said:

For the 1000000th time

 

Wish people would stop being so binary

 

You can and should hate the atrocities in Saudi

You can and should LOVE the investment in the club and city

 

You dont have to pick only 1

 

tbf I think it's that it's clearly NOT binary that's lead to this thread being 93 pages like. It's obviously very complicated, you'd be daft to suggest otherwise. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Hosting the Saudi team and wearing the Saudi kit is unfortunate IMO. Even seeing Yasir talk was a bit uncomfortable, maybe just because he looks more like a Saudi diplomat. 

 

It doesn't change the underlying situation that we are funded by a horrific regime, but it does make the link more explicit.

 

That said, it also doesn't change the fact that what Saudi do is nothing to do with Newcastle fans. We both shouldn't feel the need to defend them and shouldn't be blamed for supporting our club.

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by AyeDubbleYoo

[KaKa]

1 minute ago, arnonel said:

For the 1000000th time

 

Wish people would stop being so binary

 

You can and should hate the atrocities in Saudi

You can and should LOVE the investment in the club and city

 

You dont have to pick only 1

 

I don't know anymore ... I think if people are not going to be able to deal with them wanting a kit in their countries colours (which is mostly being done to generate interest over there, and increase the clubs commercial income), or can't deal with them wanting their national team to play games at the club, then they shouldn't accept the ownership.

 

I think more should be done to go against the ownership in that case, because it's all too hypocritical in my opinion. You can't have them spend the money they did on the club and pour so much investment into the area and then rail against them anytime they do anything that draws attention to their country. Their never going to completely dumb down where they are from, it's just not going to happen. For the most part I think they are already very tempered in the way they conduct themselves but it will never be enough for some people.

 

Why not start a more aggressive movement to get them out then? Because ultimately i think too much is being asked of the ownership and it's really not realistic.

 

 

 

 

[ohmelads]

At the moment, most of the noise being created seems extremely cynical.

 

If you want to tackle human rights links to football, and want people to genuinely challenge states like Saudi Arabia, then you need real numbers behind you across the board and the message needs to be real and not just about fucking over rival clubs. Reality is if the Saudis were forced to sell and we were banished to the lower leagues, most rival fans would immediately stop talking or thinking about Saudi Arabia and most football fans would see the 'problem' as being solved. The BBC would stop reporting on it just as they didn't report on it before and as they almost never report on it now unless it's to do with us. That doesn't benefit anyone in Saudi Arabia, or anywhere else. Sheff Utd are owned by a Saudi prince; no one cares. Arsenal will continue to get massive revenue from state-owned Emirates and have Visit Rwanda on their sleeve; nothing will be said. No one's asking Arteta about it in his post match interview. If Man U are bought out by a Qatar group, is Ten Hag going to be asked about it? No, and we all know why.

 

To get large numbers of football fans interested in human rights issues rather than fucking over their rivals, I think you need to go after the corruption at the highest levels of football and the protectionism of the established elite that forces clubs to seek outside investment (including from dodgy states) just to keep up. Newcastle fans, and fans of all clubs outside the sky 6 and their equivalents in other major European leagues, know that their club won't and can't compete without outside resources because the game's rigged against them. There's massive potential support but the Saudi ownership has become a smokescreen that turns these clubs against one another and creates a simplified narrative. It's no coincidence that the same clubs have dominated the major European leagues for decades. You'd get far more fans onside as part of a campaign to clean the whole game up rather than just getting the Saudis out to keep the sky 6 happy. 

[Wolfcastle]

1 hour ago, Smal said:

It's not just hosting any international fixture though is it. It's the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A state whose dictatorship regime commits war crimes and murders Yemeni schoolchildren, chops up journalists, executes LGBTQ people and imprisons any dissenting voices. 

 

They would be playing at SJP as a display and celebration of our club's links with that regime. 

England have played friendlies against and in Saudi Arabia. Sir Bobby famously getting the "in the name of Allah go".

 

They're fighting rebels trying to take over in Yemen who themselves are commiting those crimes. Its bad enough without the exile-esque misrepresentation of what's going on like its for no reason, deliberately targeted and they haven't been invited by the Yemeni government to help them stop an Iranian backed rebellion.

 

Having said that I'm totally against the friendly.

18 minutes ago, arnonel said:

For the 1000000th time

 

Wish people would stop being so binary

 

You can and should hate the atrocities in Saudi

You can and should LOVE the investment in the club and city

 

You dont have to pick only 1

Agree. Its a new trend of people backing themselves into corners with their stances on some things but being selective about where to apply it. Most people haven't done that so can, for example, buy trainers without ethically sourcing whether they've come from a sweatshop without meaning that they are  'pro sweatshop/slave labour' without contradiction.

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by Wolfcastle

[AyeDubbleYoo]

We should all be more ethical consumers ideally, in all areas where we spend money.

 

But football fans are particularly badly-placed to withdraw support, especially in our case since the ownership is going to make us massively successful

 

I do feel slightly weird that I was ready to completely walk away under Ashley, but now I'm 100% back in. Obviously because Ashley was destroying the club itself. But I did prove that I was prepared to walk away over ownership, he just made that particularly easy.  

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by AyeDubbleYoo

[Solitude20]

1 hour ago, Smal said:

It's not just hosting any international fixture though is it. It's the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A state whose dictatorship regime commits war crimes and murders Yemeni schoolchildren, chops up journalists, executes LGBTQ people and imprisons any dissenting voices. 

 

They would be playing at SJP as a display and celebration of our club's links with that regime. 

 

Yet you didn’t raise those concerns when we spent their money on those record transfer fees.
 

Honestly I don’t get it, how can you have no issues with spending their cash to reach where we are today, enjoying their success managing the club so far, looking forward to their future investments, and getting excited by the transformation of the club under their ownership, but if their national team plays at SJP, it suddenly becomes a step too far and only then would their human rights record matter. I don’t get it honestly. 

To me, it’s all the same. You either accept all of it or none if it. I wouldn’t go and happily accept those links that directly benefit the club and draw a line against the links that don’t. 

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

Well there is real hardship involved in accepting all of it isn't there?  bit of a cop out to me. 

[Tsunami]

Anyone know how much we’re getting paid to host this?

[Wandy]

We are in a partnership with the country of Saudi Arabia. They provide us with the funding to rebuild our football club and we provide them with the exposure to help them build a sporting empire, and thus increase their overall power & influence within the western world.

 

I don't have a problem with that at all. Having away kits that mimic the Saudi national team's, and hosting international games that feature their national team, is a very small concession to make.

 

This thread is not an accurate reflection of the overall fanbase. The vast majority are not uncomfortable with these people as club custodians. In fact they very much want them to be here.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

The way I can sleep at night is basically, I don't choose where the money comes from, I wish it came from somewhere better.

 

Thinking of PIF as a financial investment fund who invests the money on Saudi Arabia provides a bit of separation, then the likes of Staveley provide even more. 

 

Also, the PL is full of dodgy money, so why shouldn't we have some. 

 

Also, fans are locked in and their club is something that can never belong to anyone but them.

 

It's not exactly a coherent position and I know maybe I should step away. But basically I can't, so I would rather the link to KSA was as remote as possible. 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by AyeDubbleYoo