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

[KaKa]

6 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

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. 

 

 

 

 

And this is the cruel irony of this whole thing. Everyone's hands are dirty in this business.

 

Out of interest can anyone explain to me why Man City's Qatar ownership don't get anywhere near as much grief over these issues?!

 

 

[Bada Bing]

I just see it as a Faustian bargain. They give us a good team and rebuild our infrastructure and stature. In return the club has to do PR / marketing for KSA. Only time will tell whether it was ultimately worth it. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Just now, KaKa said:

 

And this is the cruel irony of this whole thing. Everyone's hands are dirty in this business.

 

Out of interest can anyone explain to me why Man City's Qatar ownership don't get anywhere near as much grief over these issues?!

 

 

 

From my uneducated view, Qatar aren't as evil and don't have quite as many high-profile crimes. Also they've been around longer. 

 

I don't think media will be able to keep this up for decades, eventually it won't be a story anymore. 

[Wullie]

Qatar having nothing whatsoever to do with Man City is also a crucial factor.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, Bada Bing said:

I just see it as a Faustian bargain. They give us a good team and rebuild our infrastructure and stature. In return the club has to do PR / marketing for KSA. Only time will tell whether it was ultimately worth it. 

 

That doesn't really answer the question of whether any amount of football success would be worth doing that. 

 

I don't think there's any doubt the club will benefit immensely. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Just now, Wullie said:

Qatar having nothing whatsoever to do with Man City is also a crucial factor.

 

Aye, Abu Dhabi.

[KaKa]

Yeah, my mistake.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

And Wullie's for being such a sarcasm ponce. 

[Kid Icarus]

12 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

I do think it's a valid point though. Mike Ashley was actually killing the thing itself, and destroying the point of being a football fan. That's happening immediately to us, it's something that causes us real daily pain. 

 

Of course what KSA do is many times worse than anything Mike Ashley has done in his life, we all know that. But it never came with the same sort of conflict that this situation does. 

 

Also, I think if KSA had taken over from a decent owner we would have had a lot more protests at the time.  

 

Howeh  I know what you mean, we all 'suffered' the Ashley years, but that's probably the most first world problem thing I've ever read like. I can just about get my head around just how powerful material interests are and all of these mad cognitive biases that are going on, but I think once you have that dichotomy of Ashley and MBS in front of you and not just in the abstract, it does makes our problem with Ashley look and feel unbelievably trivial in hindsight. 

 

Obv not saying you're comparing the two either btw, just saying that for me at least it's planted the 'it's only football' seed in my mind more than anything. 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I would say Ashley had a significant part in ruining a large part of the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. 

 

Of course if you compare the two people there's no contest in the world outside of football. 

 

But as a football fan, having your club taken away by a parasite and systematically destroyed is about the worst thing that can happen. We're very lucky we didn't end up in league one. 

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by AyeDubbleYoo

[Bada Bing]

3 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

That doesn't really answer the question of whether any amount of football success would be worth doing that. 

 

I don't think there's any doubt the club will benefit immensely. 

 

What I'm getting at here, and this is just my view, is that the gradual 'saudification' of the club makes it increasingly hard to relate to (pre-Ashley). I'm not saying that will happen, but it is a concern for me, however irrational it is. But I agree, the club on any objective measure will benefit enormously.

[ohmelads]

1 hour ago, Wullie said:

Qatar having nothing whatsoever to do with Man City is also a crucial factor.

 

Sheikh Mansour is only senior member of Abu Dhabi’s ruling family and deputy prime minister of the UAE.

 

Emitates is also state-owned.

 

It's still state interference in football (a state with serious human rights issues) without any of the noise that comes with being a club challenging the established order.

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by ohmelads

[The Prophet]

The key difference with Mike Ashley is that his ownership of the club had a negative impact. Barely anyone would have given a fuck about Sports Direct and it's dodgy practices had he steered us in a positive direction.

 

It's been done to death, but every fan will have their own moral stance on how they feel about PIF and what, if anything they want to do about that, there isn't really a right or a wrong answer.

 

For me personally I'm a Newcastle fan, not a KSA fan and I don't think hosting them in our stadium is great optics.

[TheInfiniteOdyssey]

Hope this happens. Would be absolutely brilliant for me and my in-laws if they were playing Mexico. 

[Smal]

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

Howeh  I know what you mean, we all 'suffered' the Ashley years, but that's probably the most first world problem thing I've ever read like. I can just about get my head around just how powerful material interests are and all of these mad cognitive biases that are going on, but I think once you have that dichotomy of Ashley and MBS in front of you and not just in the abstract, it does make our problem with Ashley feel trivial in hindsight. 

 

I can see what Ian means, I think, in that the problems that Ashley brought to the club were very different to an individual fan on an emotional and personal basis to the ones that KSA have brought. Yes this is a first world problem but if it's affecting your daily life, which is understandable if you're a lifelong NUFC fan with that kind of connection, then it's still a fairly big problem on that personal and emotional level. 

 

There are levels and the KSA issues are obviously worse on a macro and societal level, but I can see how it's less of a daily problem to someone in Newcastle. 

[Scoot]

I'm going to be brutally honest here. I didn't pay any attention to middle Eastern human rights before we were taken over by PIF and I haven't since they took over us. I probably won't in the future either. I know it sounds incredibly selfish but I'm really not that arsed about it as I have no connection to it. 

 

I'm purely in it for the football and if PIF want to invest in my club and make us great, that's fine with me. If Saudi Arabia are going to play and international match at St James' Park which could benefit the club in the long run, that's fine with me too.

 

I'm not going to go all mackem here and pretend I know anything about what happens in the middle east. 

 

That's my stance on the whole thing. If that makes me bad, then I apologise!

[rebelrouser]

Iran and the Shiite (minority) rebels attacked a Saudi ally (the Sunni majority) and the Saudis fought back.  Seems like a much more defendable position than the US/UK invasion of Iraq, but I'm not an expert on the issue.  

[Tiresias]

My stance is I'm not going to pretend I'm comfortable with the whole thing or i have any good answers but i do think the premier League would be better without states owning clubs and indeed sensible ownership structures all round, but i have no say in who owns my club so will enjoy what i can.

 

What i won't do is become an unpaid pr man for Saudi Arabia and pretend they're great and anyone who says different is against us. I just want is run sensibly with ambitious i don't care if that means playing along with ffp for however long. I will criticise or owners for crap just as it should be called out anywhere. I wont for a moment begrudge anyone in Newcastle choosing to not give a shit and just enjoying the ride, good the area needs it

 

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by Tiresias

[huss9]

2 hours 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. 

i agree but there's loads of murdering regimes out there.

Russia's eventually been banned

whilst Israel happily carries on.

and the US have got the world cup ffs. some of the CIA atrocities are hideous.

we then have India, Iran, China and some of the African countries.

 

I'd say the Israeli regime is the worst on the planet.

 

10 wrongs dont make a right though.

[Tiresias]

1 minute ago, huss9 said:

i agree but there's loads of murdering regimes out there.

Russia's eventually been banned

whilst Israel happily carries on.

and the US have got the world cup ffs. some of the CIA atrocities are hideous.

we then have India, Iran, China and some of the African countries.

 

I'd say the Israeli regime is the worst on the planet.

 

10 wrongs dont make a right though.

 

Honestly nation states should not own football clubs it's ridiculous they're sports clubs should be for the community not to advertise even a nice benevolent country like Iceland or something. Too much money all round

[The Butcher]

17 minutes ago, Scoot said:

I'm going to be brutally honest here. I didn't pay any attention to middle Eastern human rights before we were taken over by PIF and I haven't since they took over us. I probably won't in the future either. I know it sounds incredibly selfish but I'm really not that arsed about it as I have no connection to it. 

 

I'm purely in it for the football and if PIF want to invest in my club and make us great, that's fine with me. If Saudi Arabia are going to play and international match at St James' Park which could benefit the club in the long run, that's fine with me too.

 

I'm not going to go all mackem here and pretend I know anything about what happens in the middle east. 

 

That's my stance on the whole thing. If that makes me bad, then I apologise!

Agree 100%

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

@Scoot It doesn't make you bad at all. It does make you ignorant however. Given that you are aware that there may be a probelmatic aspect of their ownership why not take the time to learn about the issues and then see if your view changes? You might then decide that you wanted to do something. You may well decide you wanted to do nothing too. For me i'm afraid the price of this ownership should be a degree of discomfort for all fans. I may be wrong in that view but it's a conversation that won't go away and it is also an important conversation. I really don't have an answer beyond being open to thinking about it. 

[TRC]

I dont really have any issue with Saudi's owning us or even State ownership, everyone has to play by the same rules now so it doesn't bother me in a footballing sense.

 

I find it difficult to really care about other countries comiting 'atrocities' when the UK are sending refugees to Rwanda. I don't think owning a football club changes anything personally. Sportswashing has become a watered down term used to cause outrage. To me Saudi sees how Dubai is a destination, and they want a piece of that pie, its 100% about money, I dont think they give a shit what the rest of the world think of them.

 

Just my opinion, if I'm wrong feel free to educate.

[Wandy]

34 minutes ago, Scoot said:

I'm going to be brutally honest here. I didn't pay any attention to middle Eastern human rights before we were taken over by PIF and I haven't since they took over us. I probably won't in the future either. I know it sounds incredibly selfish but I'm really not that arsed about it as I have no connection to it. 

 

I'm purely in it for the football and if PIF want to invest in my club and make us great, that's fine with me. If Saudi Arabia are going to play and international match at St James' Park which could benefit the club in the long run, that's fine with me too.

 

I'm not going to go all mackem here and pretend I know anything about what happens in the middle east. 

 

That's my stance on the whole thing. If that makes me bad, then I apologise!

 

You basically just spoke for 99% of the fanbase.

[Stifler]

1 minute ago, Tiresias said:

 

Honestly nation states should not own football clubs it's ridiculous they're sports clubs should be for the community not to advertise even a nice benevolent country like Iceland or something. Too much money all round

People only say this because it’s the Middle East countries who own football clubs.

If the U.K. government bought Man Utd, other than non-Man Utd fans, there would be no debate really.

Most Russian and Ukrainian clubs originated under the guise of different government departments.

German clubs originated under big companies, many of whom are global brands/conglomerates, Bayer, VW, Mercedes. The same applies to PSV in the Netherlands.

 

Honestly I‘m past the point of giving a fuck anymore. If people don’t like being owned by Saudi’s then fine, shut up and let those who do enjoy it get on with it.

On the same note, those who are not bothered shouldn’t be chastising those who don’t, which happens on social media.