Sven Botman back late December/early January 'at the earliest' (Howe)

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, Wolfcastle said:

They wouldn't have defended or deflected things before the takever because they were never brought up to anywhere near this degree before, so intsead of 'sportswashing' its highlighted things more.

 

The crucial point is that they're defending and deflecting. If it had simply highlighted things more as you say and those same people weren't doing any defending and deflecting I'd fully agree with you, but they are. 

 

That's just a tiny part of it anyway, as is the sports part a small part of the attempted larger whitewashing that companies and countries do. They're not doing these things by accident like, I totally get the discussion over how effective it is and whether it actually just highlights the problems they're supposedly trying to cover, but saying it doesn't exist at all isn't right. 

[TRon]

Anyway Sven Botman - it's nice to be able to go head to head with clubs like Milan for these players.

[Kid Icarus]

9 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

Not seen anyone defending what the Saudi's do because they bought the club. Is that actually happening?

 

At most they are just letting other fans get under their skin and so are firing back about the hypocrisy of it all in annoyance, and then being petty by carrying the flag or dressing up in their attire, which is ridiculous, but in no way means they care about and now support the Saudis or their practices.

 

If we are talking about people genuinely now looking more favourably on these countries because of a football club, that just is not happening, no one cares enough to do such a thing. I think it is preposterous.

 

 

 

 

The rationale for defending and deflecting doesn't change the fact that they're doing it. It is happening yes - all you have to do is read the threads on here when it was looking like happening in 2020, or just on Twitter in general.

 

No one's out there saying to themselves "I'm going to defend the things the Saudis have done" like, who would? They're out there defending our relationship with our owners and in doing so often cross the line into inadvertantly defending and deflecting from the things the Saudis have done.

 

Because of our fans' emotional link to the club, when people come along and legitimately criticise the owners and our relationship with them, fans take it to heart (because of our emotional attachment to the club) and in trying to defend something they love, end up defending and deflecting for the Saudis.

I'm not moralising or owt, it seems like a pretty clear cut case of people defending their emotional attachment and looking after their own material interests, but I think it's weird that people also try and pretend it's not happening. 

[Kid Icarus]

Timely

 

https://freakonomics.com/podcast/what-is-sportswashing-and-does-it-work/

[Kasper]

1 hour ago, HTT II said:

Sportswashing doesn’t exist! Or certainly doesn’t work, that’s not why these people buy football clubs or invest in other industries, sports and businesses.

 

 

 

 

Really can't tell if this is sarcasm or just really strange opinion.

[McCormick]

4 minutes ago, TRon said:

Anyway Sven Botman - it's nice to be able to go head to head with clubs like Milan for these players.

Sempre Milan have released another piece saying Botman “only wants Milan” and has no interest in us. Obviously we know this is horseshit, but their coverage of this whole saga is getting downright disrespectful.

[Gaztoon]

Just now, McCormick said:

Sempre Milan have released another piece saying Botman “only wants Milan” and has no interest in us. Obviously we know this is horseshit, but their coverage of this whole saga is getting downright disrespectful.

 

The fewm from the Milan press will be glorious if we sign him.

[sushimonster85]

2 minutes ago, McCormick said:

Sempre Milan have released another piece saying Botman “only wants Milan” and has no interest in us. Obviously we know this is horseshit, but their coverage of this whole saga is getting downright disrespectful.

 

I do think it's been eye-opening seeing how Italian (but especially Milan based) media essentially acts as propaganda for it's clubs when it comes to transfer battles like these. 

[Stifler]

38 minutes ago, nufc123 said:

Yeah i hear from Amnesty etc that sport washing exist, but i cant see how it works. Every time somebody see a nufc shirt now, everybody (except our fanbase) will relate that shirt to bad owners, dictators, oil, state owned etc. If we should reach a CL finale then billions of people will get the truth about our owners. Billions will see the finale and out of the TV there will come tons of negative things about the ownership. What will this benefit for sports washing. As I said you will get the fanbase "defend" it, but the rest of the world will shoot at you. Isnt it better to live your dictatorship in silence? 

I guess they can’t. The economy will run out when the world relies less on oil and/or it dries up. They need an economy if they are to still have the money coming in.

 

They are wanting to push themselves into places, hence why they are buying us, doing the LIV tour etc.

The thing is the likes of PIF and other Gulf investment funds could easily just be silent investors and bring the money in, but no gulf nation is happy with that. They want a role to play in this world. This is why they are buying us etc, they need to push themselves into the frame. The only thing is that eventually to be accepted long term at the table, they will have to become more liberal, and more palatable to western ideologies.

 

They can Sports wash all they want, it’s not going to work unless they become less conservative in their own way.

 

 

Edited June 13, 2022 by Stifler

[TRon]

5 minutes ago, McCormick said:

Sempre Milan have released another piece saying Botman “only wants Milan” and has no interest in us. Obviously we know this is horseshit, but their coverage of this whole saga is getting downright disrespectful.

 

Not to mention desperate. It certainly makes Italian football seem a bit less attractive when you see how they carry on.

[Bondedcrown]

Any point to this discussion?

 

[KaKa]

17 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

The rationale for defending and deflecting doesn't change the fact that they're doing it. It is happening yes - all you have to do is read the threads on here when it was looking like happening in 2020, or just on Twitter in general.

 

No one's out there saying to themselves "I'm going to defend the things the Saudis have done" like, who would? They're out there defending our relationship with our owners and in doing so often cross the line into inadvertantly defending and deflecting from the things the Saudis have done.

 

Because of our fans' emotional link to the club, when people come along and legitimately criticise the owners and our relationship with them, fans take it to heart (because of our emotional attachment to the club) and in trying to defend something they love, end up defending and deflecting for the Saudis.

I'm not moralising or owt, it seems like a pretty clear cut case of people defending their emotional attachment and looking after their own material interests, but I think it's weird that people also try and pretend it's not happening. 

 

Defending Saudi practices, would be saying that there is nothing wrong with it. Not seen that happening.

 

I'm sorry you cannot say defending the relationship with the owners of the club, is inadvertently defending and deflecting the abhorrent practices being carried out by the ruling Saudi regime. Not having that.

 

The main reason people get annoyed by the criticising of the club, fans and ownership is because the fucking Premier League allows these sorts of people to buy the club, which is the main issue here. The Premier League deemed the buyers to be separate from the Saudi state, but then as soon as the deal goes through, everyone piles in and has a go at the fans of the club that had no power or say in the whole transaction in the first place. In that situation it's no surprise the fans then feel the need to defend themselves and the ownership.

 

The whole thing is an absolute nonsense. 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 13, 2022 by KaKa

[Bondedcrown]

any point to this thread then?

[Chris_R]

10 minutes ago, Bondedcrown said:

any point to this thread then?

Yeah, it's a discussion forum and people are having a discussion.

[Guest reefatoon]

Any updates on Botman?..............

 

Oohhhh, this old regurgitated shit again.

 

[Kid Icarus]

24 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

Defending Saudi practices, would be saying that there is nothing wrong with it. Not seen that happening.

 

I'm sorry you cannot say defending the relationship with the owners of the club, is inadvertently defending and deflecting the abhorrent practices being carried out by the ruling Saudi regime. Not having that.

 

The main reason people take the criticising of the club, fans and ownership is because the fucking Premier League allows these sorts of people to buy the club, which is the main issue here. The Premier League deemed the buyers to be separate form the Saudi state, but then as soon as the deal goes through, everyone piles in and has a go at the fans of the club that had no power or say in the whole transaction in the first place. In that situation it's no surprise the fans then feel the need to defend themselves and the ownership.

 

The whole thing is an absolute nonsense. 

 

 

 

If you didn't see it then I'm pleased for you, because I wish I'd never seen it either.

 

Attacking Amnesty International and Hatice Cengiz, constantly bringing up everywhere and everything that's done the terrible things Saudi Arabia has, pointing to the other things Saudi Arabia invests in, that the UK sells them weapons so why should we care, claiming people didn't care about it before they bought us, claiming it was all an anti-NUFC agenda, that it's racist, or just outright that they don't care. Ringing any bells?

 

Not saying all of them don't have fair arguments attached to them, but getting into the realms of saying things like  'well they bomb such and such, why are you picking on me?' is getting into the realms of inadvertantly putting forward the philosophical argument of 'if everyone's guilty no one's guilty' when really you're just trying to defend supporting your football club, which no one should have to do. 

 

Re the bit in bold, I didn't say that it is that, I said they end up crossing the line and doing that like in the examples above.

 

I've said it many times, but under Ashley the excuse was 'support the team not the regime' and the truth is that we didn't have a say in any of it. We can quite easily leave it at that, but there are some that will defend and deflect for the owners and it's self-evident that there are those in our fanbase (and Man City's) who do that, so not absolute nonsense at all. 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 13, 2022 by Kid Icarus

[Kid Icarus]

31 minutes ago, Bondedcrown said:

Any point to this discussion?

 

 

Yes mate, it's a forum. 

[Kid Icarus]

Sorry for the interupting the thread with a conversation. Please feel free to get back to the golden 'huhuhuh he's slow' patter for the next 48 hours 

 

 

Edited June 13, 2022 by Kid Icarus

[Keegans Export]

8 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Sorry for the interupting the thread with a conversation. Please feel free to get back to the golden 'huhuhuh he's slow' patter for the next 48 hours 

tbf it is the "Sven Botman" thread, would this particular conversation not be better had in the "Saudi ownership" thread instead?

[KaKa]

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

If you didn't see it then I'm pleased for you, because I wish I'd never seen it either.

 

Attacking Amnesty International and Hatice Cengiz, constantly bringing up everywhere and everything that's done the terrible things Saudi Arabia has, pointing to the other things Saudi Arabia invests in, that the UK sells them weapons so why should we care, claiming people didn't care about it before they bought us, claiming it was all an anti-NUFC agenda, that it's racist, or just outright that they don't care. Ringing any bells?

 

Not saying all of them don't have fair arguments attached to them, but getting into the realms of saying things like  'well they bomb such and such, why are you picking on me?' is getting into the realms of inadvertantly putting forward the philosophical argument of 'if everyone's guilty no one's guilty' when really you're just trying to defend supporting your football club, which no one should have to do. 

 

Re the bit in bold, I didn't say that it is that, I said they end up crossing the line and doing that like in the examples above.

 

I've said it many times, but under Ashley the excuse was 'support the team not the regime' and the truth is that we didn't have a say in any of it. We can quite easily leave it at that, but there are some that will defend and deflect for the owners and it's self-evident that there are those in our fanbase (and Man City's) who do that, so not absolute nonsense at all. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, fair enough then. I agree getting into some of those arguments is pointless and doesn't come across well, but it is borne out of frustration and being on put on the defensive and so I do somewhat understand why it happens.

 

I think it is completely ridiculous that these ownership issues are thrown in the faces of the fans tbh. Most aren't clued up enough to have to defend themselves on these things, and so it's going to always lead to a lot of very clumsy things being said when they get riled up.

 

Once the Premier League determined the ownership was separate from the Saudi state and passed the thing through, what on Earth can be done then. All these folks then coming in saying 'Well, no actually, you are directly aligned with the Saudi state and every evil thing they do', is just an impossible situation.

[KaKa]

Just now, Keegans Export said:

tbf it is the "Sven Botman" thread, would this particular conversation not be better had in the "Saudi ownership" thread instead?

 

Yes, this is true. Noted. No more Saudi talk from me on here.

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, Keegans Export said:

tbf it is the "Sven Botman" thread, would this particular conversation not be better had in the "Saudi ownership" thread instead?

 

Wouldn't have a problem with it all being moved in there if the mods wanted to, the conversation just flowed to this, as they do. 

[Big River]

just to get things back on track. I've heard Sven has signed a new boot deal

 

[Izakaya]

3 minutes ago, Big River said:

just to get things back on track. I've heard Sven has signed a new boot deal

 

Don't give Balenciaga any ideas

[Kid Icarus]

12 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

Yeah, fair enough then. I agree getting into some of those arguments is pointless and doesn't come across well, but it is borne out of frustration and being on put on the defensive and so I do somewhat understand why it happens.

 

I think it is completely ridiculous that these ownership issues are thrown in the faces of the fans tbh. Most aren't clued up enough to have to defend themselves on these things, and so it's going to always lead to a lot of very clumsy things being said when they get riled up.

 

Once the Premier League determined the ownership was separate from the Saudi state and passed the thing through, what on Earth can be done then. All these folks then coming in saying 'Well, no actually, you are directly aligned with the Saudi state and every evil thing they do', is just an impossible situation.

 

This we can agree on. The whole debate being played out among fans and sportsmen and women is ideal for those with actual power and is malpractice on the part of journalists imo. I've said it before but they have no intellectual curiosity and are far too preoccupied with moralising.