• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

ALL NUFC and Sportwashing stuff in here. (Threads will be merged)

Status
Not open for further replies.

I agree the rules need to be changed. I do not support the sale. The issue I have is, prior to the Saudi's, we had Abu Dhabi and the Russians. I do not recall, but will stand correction, the likes of Man United & LFC challenging the rules when Roman bought Chelsea or them requesting changes to the rules when City's new owners arrived.
What has changed?
Is it a case of NUFC's new owners have crossed an imaginary line of abhorrence or is it that the 'usual hierarchy' might change?
A bit of both (re: your last sentence)

Man Utd, liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs, chelsea, city and Spurs’ owners lost any respect I had for them with the super league crack recently

maybe as I get older I get more cynical but I really have to look hard these days to remember why I fell in love with the game

I spend more time watching highlights from 80s and 90s on YouTube than I do watching live football these days
 
Got a summary mate? I don't have a subscription.
I've not read the full article but I have seen an extract on a Palace site. One chairman said that the Saudi's threatened to sue Steve Parish so Parish said he didn't give a shit about their threats and ultimately from there 18 clubs voted against the sponsorship.

We're already enemies of the Saudis and the Jawdee Nayshun.
 
I agree the rules need to be changed. I do not support the sale. The issue I have is, prior to the Saudi's, we had Abu Dhabi and the Russians. I do not recall, but will stand correction, the likes of Man United & LFC challenging the rules when Roman bought Chelsea or them requesting changes to the rules when City's new owners arrived.
What has changed?
Is it a case of NUFC's new owners have crossed an imaginary line of abhorrence or is it that the 'usual hierarchy' might change?

I think it is the sheer scale of the potential backing and inter-connected nature. Effectively KSA own NUFC and with it goes the influence and power of KSA.

When you look at potential sponsors PIF own 44bn (70%) in Saudi Telecom, 29bn (37%) in the National Bank, 22bn (74%)in Saudi Electric, 20bn (67%) in Saudi Arabian Mining Co. And these are just the listed companies. They are clearly influential in the day to day running and could insist they sponsor NUFC, I guess people will draw parallels with Etihad and the sponsorship of City but it the relationship is much more blurred.

You could say that Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan is connected as he is married to one of the daughters of Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the ruler of UAE, but UAE is Federal elective constitutional monarchy whereas Saudi is Unitary Islamic absolute monarchy with MBS at the top. Also UAE is a mere gnat in comparison to KSA.
 
You believe that line to be "imaginary".
Pretty much says it all really. No need for a counter argument here.
Really?
So the behaviour of Russia, & Abu Dhabi, to those who do not tow the line or minorities is fine because it is not quite as abhorrent as the Saudi's is fine?
No need for a counter argument here.
Ignoring the previous 'worst' because there is a new 'worst' hardly solves the problem. Newcastle really are not the first example of Sportswashing.
 
Keef Downie has shown his true colours during this time, I hope he’s never allowed to step foot in the SOL again. Same goes for Hope, caulkin and all their mag journo mates.

I don't have the 'know-how' but I'd love to see a banner display in the South Stand prior to kick off at a an upcoming home game letting them know our feelings on exactly this
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top