Jump to content

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


UncleBingo

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

I’m guessing because sportspeople took a moral stance and refused to play apartheid SA?

 

The straightforward answer would have been ‘I don’t think KSA is the same as apartheid SA’.  

It probably would have been yeah, but we don’t know what the journalist would have followed up with. He was ultimately put on the spot by a difficult journalist and understandably not used to answering questions about his morals. 

 

It also wasn’t the only scenario he was asked about and perhaps it was a time in history he didn’t really know about. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, St. Maximin said:

It probably would have been yeah, but we don’t know what the journalist would have followed up with. He was ultimately put on the spot by a difficult journalist and understandably not used to answering questions about his morals. 

 

It also wasn’t the only scenario he was asked about and perhaps it was a time in history he didn’t really know about. 

Yeah, it is for me easy to forget that these blokes likely don’t directly remember it - and there’s a good chance they aren’t history buffs :)

 

It is a tricky one, and like most I find sports hacks on a selective high horse tiresome.  It does look like their PR people prepped them beforehand re KSA questions, but they probably didn’t anticipate comparative questions.

 

Mind, I do also think that individual sports - where you’re effectively self-employed and directly taking the coin - actually have more of a case to answer than a footballer taking money off a club.  Even clubs like Man City make most of their income from TV and corporate rather than ‘iffy’ sponsorship deals

Link to post
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Awaymag said:

I really don't give a shit but Sky sports asking these questions and then still want access to these players.....I know what I would do.      

 

How is this different from when we were all outraged at Ashley regime banning reporters who criticized him? No-one then was sympathetic to Ashley's side. It is a reporters job to ask why someone has decided to take money from someone, if they were comfortable taking the money they should be comfortable explaining themselves. It's not like everyone doesn't know why. These people have PR guys, someone easily could have given them a decent line of defense such as, 'I am excited at the opportunity, Saudi Arabla is not the same as Aparteid and while I do not endorse everything the Saudi state does I do not feel I am doing that by taking part in this golf tournament. I hope with more scruitny comes more openness and some of the issues can be improved. I think this could be a great tour for the audience and am excited at the opportunity.' or some bullshit like that. It will blow over. 

 

Of course journalists could be more critical of other clubs/institutions/tours etc but noone should be shocked to be asked about money from Saudi Arabia, it's going to happen, it is the journalists job to ask. And if we don't have journalists asking difficult questions things like that massive sexual abuse scandal at football clubs that came out a few years ago would never have happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ben said:

Without sounding like a broken record the UK and its citizens have been taking the coin from Saudi and its neighbours for years whether it be arms deals or pipe fitters working on oil rigs.

 

People like Barry Glenndinning are taking a moral high groud to try and sound clever an important but let's face it ge probably tweets on an I phone that was made in a bamboo hut by 6 year old kids.

 

Not defending Glenndinning because it doesn't apply to him and he's a cunt, but when I've thought about the whole hypocrisy thing, for me it comes down to two different things.

 

  1. whether people are in unavoidable or institutionalised situations (driving cars, using Amazon, eating meat, using technology etc)

or

 

    2. active participants who excuse themselves of not making the sacrifices they think others should be making.

 

I've said it before but our society has been created using a system where it's impossible to anyone to not be some form of hypocrite. Pointing out that things can be and should be better isn't wrong in those circumstances.

 

 

Edited by Kid Icarus

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

Not defending Glenndinning because it doesn't apply to him and he's a cunt, but when I've thought about the whole hypocrisy thing, for me it comes down to two different things.

 

  1. whether people are in unavoidable or institutionalised situations (driving cars, using Amazon, eating meat, using technology etc)

or

 

    2. active participants who excuse themselves of not making the sacrifices they think others should be making.

 

I've said it before but our society has been created using a system where it's impossible to anyone to not be some form of hypocrite. Pointing out that things can be and should be better isn't wrong in those circumstances.

 

 

 

 

image.thumb.jpeg.24068819c8f71df1cb7ca10b07e4a350.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't, because I have seen F1 attacked for racing in those countries all the time. When they raced in saudi arabia a lot of the drivers were vocally unhappy to the point that it was mooted they would boycott. That is classic case of 'i haven't paid attention to something and therefore i believe it hasnt happened'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/06/2022 at 08:03, TheBrownBottle said:

'Would you have played in Apartheid SA?' is a straightforward tbh.  Sportspeople didn't play there.

 

When was that? the 1980's? When bouncers were limitedto one per over because West Indian bowlers were too dangerous with them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Pandamninator said:

 

Yes they did - both in golf and other sports.

 

By breaking sanctions, yeah, and coining it in. There's no doubt the sports and arts boycott of S'africa played its part but it was the political/ economic pressure that was the main international driver. None of that would have mattered one jot without the sacrifices and effort of the indigenous population and their supporters. 

If anything sports people should be grilled for having anything to do with murderous apartheid Israel if RKSA is the benchmark.

 

As the Kid said previously the globalisation of everything we use means it would be very difficult to live a pure guilt-free existence. Christians for eg, or socialists for that matter, can't be expected to live in cardboard boxes feeding of weeds they've self cultivated whilst anything they "earn" has to go to charity. Not everyone has to be Jesus.

 

We all know SA is an unsavory regime. So is China. Russia now. SA is but UAE not so much, not Qatar. India, Brazil, Hungary, The former Russian 'stans, Israel, The Taliban now but not in the 80s when they were our pals, seemingly. Thing is we, and more importantly the US deal with these countries. Always have always will. One minute they're pals, next minute they're enemies. Largely depends on how compliant they are to the US' needs.

 

Absolutely Yemenis are getting bombed with our missiles fired from our planes bought by SA. The weapons industry brings in lots of money and lots of "jobs", innit

Christ I remember watching our boys in San Carlos Bay getting pulverised by Argentinians firing French missiles with some parts in them made in Britain ffs. 

 

Anyway much like "woke" "snowflake" "whataboutary" & "cancel culture" "sportswashing" doesn't exsist. If it did the whole world and their dog wouldn't be debating exactly how bad a country they are, surely?

 

 

Morning. Up The Toon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II

I’d love to go off grid, just buy some land, buy a bus, convert it into a home and grow our own food and stuff. Maybe when the kids are older!

Link to post
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Pandamninator said:

 

Yes they did - both in golf and other sports.

 

A handful of utter cunts did break the cultural embargo on SA, that’s true.  And they were (correctly) criticised for it.

 

Football actually took some of the biggest strides of all, expelling SA from FIFA.  Cricket and rugby also took solid stances.

 

Most golf club during this period had their very own version of apartheid, with non-white players not allowed to play.  Because golf has long been a game played by complete and utter cunts

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
18 minutes ago, Coffee_Johnny said:

What no tinterweb? There’s be murder! 

I’d give it up for a tranquil paradise type life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Slim said:

New Buzz Lightyear movie banned in Saudi.

 

They do like a cinema ban.  At least with Dr Strange it was because it contained magic - and sorcery and black magic still carries the death penalty over there, so, fair dos?

 

At some point the 18th Century will come knocking, and that’ll be eye-opening for them

Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be Giggs but Saudi are taking anything rainbow-coloured off the shelves for "contradicting the Islamic faith and public morals and promoting homosexual colours targeting the younger generation"

 

The rainbow laces thing seems a bit hollow in this context tbf. It will be a long time for them to change by the looks of things

 

 

 

Edited by Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

As an American Toon supporter watching the increasingly absurd news roll in from Florida tonight, I have to say I'm starting to have a bad bad feeling that NUFC is somehow going to get caught up in Trump's downfall.

 

One of the more plausible seeming explanations for what's going on might be that Trump did some light treason with our nuclear secrets and laundered the payments via... the Saudi PIF? Which presumably would reopen the whole awkward "is the PIF separate from the Saudi state" question again in a way that could easily end very badly for us? 

 

Hoping I'm very wrong but if Donald Fucking Trump somehow manages to destroy this football club, just when we finally have something to be hopeful for, after already destroying most of whatever good was left of my country... :angry:

Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s just crazy talk. 
i say this as a dual citizen who grew up in Newcastle and California and has worked in politics and. Government for over 30

years in both countries. 
if Trump goes down and PIF is involved SA and PIF will be protected because it is politically advantageous and easy to do so.

i am not necessarily happy with this by the way, but that is the reality. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...