• 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.

NUFC Sportswashing 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.

Redandwhitedust said:
And any other team who were purchased by the Saudi regime would have got the same flak.

Can you imagine Liverpool fans being quiet if the Saudis had bought Everton? Or Villa fans just accepting that Birmingham were owned by Bin Salman. No

Would we have been as vocal if it had been Cardiff. Of course not.

But it was Newcastle, and their fans have to accept that their owners come with criticism.

As I've said before, the stance of some mags in defending the Saudi state is on a par with drinking in a pub owned by Jimmy Saville and ignoring everything Saville did because he has put sky sports in. But not only drinking in the pub but telling others how great Saville is because he's putting money into your local and spending huge wages on bar staff

It's bizarre
Click to expand...

I like your Saville analagy.

The prolonged takeover allowed the Saudi's to test the water to see how they would be received.

I can also tell you that PIF have been frequent visitors at Anfield over the years. Why that never led to a bid who knows? Personally I don't think hard core Liverpool fans would have been as welcoming.

What Keith doesn't seem to see is that you can be a loyal mag and not have to constantly apologise, defend the owners, saying how great a place it is etc. It is a two way street - mags get money, Saudi get a football club. This is the bit I find bizarre.
 
jlaws said:
I like your Saville analagy.

The prolonged takeover allowed the Saudi's to test the water to see how they would be received.

I can also tell you that PIF have been frequent visitors at Anfield over the years. Why that never led to a bid who knows? Personally I don't think hard core Liverpool fans would have been as welcoming.

What Keith doesn't seem to see is that you can be a loyal mag and not have to constantly apologise, defend the owners, saying how great a place it is etc. It is a two way street - mags get money, Saudi get a football club. This is the bit I find bizarre.
Click to expand...

Feel free to use the Saville analogy as much as you like. I've not met a single person who can argue its any different. It shuts up the debate instantly.
 
Here is the Ian Huntley analogy for the Mags takeover.

Ian Huntley gets released from Frankland or wherever the disgusting individual resides with £10 in his pocket.

He uses £5 to buy a share in Tesco and the other £5 to buy ingredients for sandwiches.

He sets up a stall called 'Ian Huntley's Sandwiches' and starts making (and trying to sell) his bait.

Now - would you boycott Tesco because of Huntley's minor (and singularly non-influential) share ownership or would you boycott his solely owned and controlled sandwich enterprise?
 
StanleyRednWhite said:
Can't believe after eveything I've wrote on twitter I get a ban for calling some OAP wannabe hooligan a MONGREL

Logon or register to see this image
Click to expand...

"Hello fuckthemags"

Sandwich all ower🤣🤣🤣
Cookie said:
Here is the Ian Huntley analogy for the Mags takeover.

Ian Huntley gets released from Frankland or wherever the disgusting individual resides with £10 in his pocket.

He uses £5 to buy a share in Tesco and the other £5 to buy ingredients for sandwiches.

He sets up a stall called 'Ian Huntley's Sandwiches' and starts making (and trying to sell) his bait.

Now - would you boycott Tesco because of Huntley's minor (and singularly non-influential) share ownership or would you boycott his solely owned and controlled sandwich enterprise?
Click to expand...

These analogies arent needed. They know exactly what theyve done, they just wont admit it so resort to ridiculous whataboutery
 
Last edited:
Cookie said:
Here is the Ian Huntley analogy for the Mags takeover.

Ian Huntley gets released from Frankland or wherever the disgusting individual resides with £10 in his pocket.

He uses £5 to buy a share in Tesco and the other £5 to buy ingredients for sandwiches.

He sets up a stall called 'Ian Huntley's Sandwiches' and starts making (and trying to sell) his bait.

Now - would you boycott Tesco because of Huntley's minor (and singularly non-influential) share ownership or would you boycott his solely owned and controlled sandwich enterprise?
Click to expand...

That works as well, in response to the Disney whataboutery.

The reason I like the pub analogy though, is because people have some loyalty and affection to their pub in the same way they have an affection to their team. People love their local.

But even so, if Saville and Huntley bought it outright, no one would defend them if they bought a local pub to clean up their image. No one would say "they've done out the toilets, put in craft beer and sky sports - they're trying to change".

But in football.... suddenly genocidal murderers are canny. Because they've bought Chris Wood
SaintJude said:
Tom White “We are told the owners only want to sign players who would stay at the club IF they do go down” hahahahahahahahahahh
Click to expand...

Sensible business. Sort of thing Ashley would have done. And been shouted at for!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top