The Official Newcastle United Thread
Discussion
Feel sorry for the Newcastle fans, so many other clubs with dubious owners etc and now the league decide to stick their beaks in (or stick their beaks in and keep them buried for long enough) and the deal is pulled. Double standards and it's either the same rules for everyone or they apply to no-one. Hope you guys find new investors/buyers soon.
Sounds like plenty other clubs stuck their beak in, worried about the prospect of Newcastle United with ambition. Protectionism of product, nothing to do with level competition. Its ok for them to have hundreds of millions at their disposal, as long as its just them and a couple of other clubs fighting for league and Champs League every year.
Hopefully another party will become interested to end Ashley's grip.
Hopefully another party will become interested to end Ashley's grip.
Chicken Chaser said:
Sounds like plenty other clubs stuck their beak in, worried about the prospect of Newcastle United with ambition. Protectionism of product, nothing to do with level competition. Its ok for them to have hundreds of millions at their disposal, as long as its just them and a couple of other clubs fighting for league and Champs League every year.
Hopefully another party will become interested to end Ashley's grip.
I’m not holding out much hope. The Saudis want to buy good PR. This was a route by spending not much to them in reality. The prom league told them to do one, the clubs closed to new members. Hopefully another party will become interested to end Ashley's grip.
Unless the Chinese government decide its a good post COVID hearts and minds exercise then who else is there? The state the club is in its worth about £100m and needs about double that in investment. It’s not just the team, the training grounds, facilities and even the stadium are all sub par. So it’s not really attractive to an investment group, especially when the world economy is about to implode.
So who is the richest Nufc fan who wants a play thing as a folly to spunk his money away? Is Blair worth billions yet?
Being reported in The Daily Telegraph this morning that the American group led by Henry Mauriss (Clear TV) have agreed a price with Ashley (rumoured to be £350m) and have the funds in place to proceed. Apparently there will be no updates or briefings until a deal's finalised but the report suggests the new owners could be in place by the start of the new season; appreciate you've had a lot of false dawns - and will therefore only believe it when it happens - but hopefully this one will come through for you.
castex said:
I'm quite cross about this. The wanton display of double standards is staggering.
You think?Look, there are some dubious owners of PL clubs (mine included) but nothing on this scale. The people who wanted to buy your club publicly behead, on average, 20 people a month, for "sorcery". And if you're wondering what sorcery is, it's the catch all offence that enables you to murder people who criticise the regime, but who haven't actually done anything else wrong.
Now Mike Ashley has his faults, but if he's beheading 20 Sport Direct employees a month for speaking out against him, I've missed that story.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Look, there are some dubious owners of PL clubs (mine included) but nothing on this scale. The people who wanted to buy your club publicly behead, on average, 20 people a month, for "sorcery". And if you're wondering what sorcery is, it's the catch all offence that enables you to murder people who criticise the regime, but who haven't actually done anything else wrong.
Ironically it doesn't appear that human rights issues were anything to do with the PL not wanting it to happen.TwigtheWonderkid said:
castex said:
I'm quite cross about this. The wanton display of double standards is staggering.
You think?Look, there are some dubious owners of PL clubs (mine included) but nothing on this scale. The people who wanted to buy your club publicly behead, on average, 20 people a month, for "sorcery". And if you're wondering what sorcery is, it's the catch all offence that enables you to murder people who criticise the regime, but who haven't actually done anything else wrong.
Now Mike Ashley has his faults, but if he's beheading 20 Sport Direct employees a month for speaking out against him, I've missed that story.
I am late to this debate having listened to Jim White on TalkSport this morning, so am not up to speed with all the facts
biggbn said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
castex said:
I'm quite cross about this. The wanton display of double standards is staggering.
You think?Look, there are some dubious owners of PL clubs (mine included) but nothing on this scale. The people who wanted to buy your club publicly behead, on average, 20 people a month, for "sorcery". And if you're wondering what sorcery is, it's the catch all offence that enables you to murder people who criticise the regime, but who haven't actually done anything else wrong.
Now Mike Ashley has his faults, but if he's beheading 20 Sport Direct employees a month for speaking out against him, I've missed that story.
I am late to this debate having listened to Jim White on TalkSport this morning, so am not up to speed with all the facts
Not pointed at anyone here, but I find it a bit funny that a lot of people suddenly developed a moral compass against the PIF when it comes to the Newcastle takeover, but continue to use services in which the PIF have a large stake, ie Uber.
Never bothered them when they were getting cheap taxis, but lets protest against a potentially competitive Newcastle. What is modern life these days, if not doublethink.
Never bothered them when they were getting cheap taxis, but lets protest against a potentially competitive Newcastle. What is modern life these days, if not doublethink.
Rojibo said:
Not pointed at anyone here, but I find it a bit funny that a lot of people suddenly developed a moral compass against the PIF when it comes to the Newcastle takeover, but continue to use services in which the PIF have a large stake, ie Uber.
Never bothered them when they were getting cheap taxis, but lets protest against a potentially competitive Newcastle. What is modern life these days, if not doublethink.
And by the same token, many NUFC fans no doubt been very happy to have called out Chelsea, Arsenal, Man City and others for the legitimacy of their owners, but are suddenly distraught that they haven't been taken over by people 10 times worse than any of that lot....put together! Never bothered them when they were getting cheap taxis, but lets protest against a potentially competitive Newcastle. What is modern life these days, if not doublethink.
biggbn said:
I am late to this debate having listened to Jim White on TalkSport this morning, so am not up to speed with all the facts
Apparently the Reverend has just been on, not a direct quote but something along the lines of they've been through the mill they've been locked down, some of them have lost relatives and through all of this we have had to deal with the Premier Leagues handling of this takeover.
fair enough being annoyed/pissed off but come on that's gotta be a joke but then again
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Rojibo said:
Not pointed at anyone here, but I find it a bit funny that a lot of people suddenly developed a moral compass against the PIF when it comes to the Newcastle takeover, but continue to use services in which the PIF have a large stake, ie Uber.
Never bothered them when they were getting cheap taxis, but lets protest against a potentially competitive Newcastle. What is modern life these days, if not doublethink.
And by the same token, many NUFC fans no doubt been very happy to have called out Chelsea, Arsenal, Man City and others for the legitimacy of their owners, but are suddenly distraught that they haven't been taken over by people 10 times worse than any of that lot....put together! Never bothered them when they were getting cheap taxis, but lets protest against a potentially competitive Newcastle. What is modern life these days, if not doublethink.
I have however heard Newcastle fans calls out other owners who have treated their club and fans badly.
The Saudis are pretty unpleasant, but let’s not pretend this is anything other than the big clubs have blocked this.
Flumpo said:
The Saudis are pretty unpleasant, but let’s not pretend this is anything other than the big clubs have blocked this.
What evidence do you have for this assertion. First of all, the PL never blocked it. They may well have done in due course, but the buyers have pulled out due to the delay. Secondly, I understand the main concern of the PL was the Saudi enabled pirating of PL broadcasts for illegal streams. This was more important to them than the appalling human rights abuses, which I think go a bit beyond "pretty unpleasant".Honestly, you lot should be thanking your lucky stars you've dodged this bullet.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
What evidence do you have for this assertion. First of all, the PL never blocked it. They may well have done in due course, but the buyers have pulled out due to the delay. Secondly, I understand the main concern of the PL was the Saudi enabled pirating of PL broadcasts for illegal streams. This was more important to them than the appalling human rights abuses, which I think go a bit beyond "pretty unpleasant".
The PL requested that the Saudi state became the owners of the club, rather than PIF. That was obviously impossible, so in effect the PL did block it.Statement from Staveley –
"The Premier League wanted the country, Saudi, to become a director of the football club. That’s what this is about. They were effectively saying ‘PIF wouldn’t be the ultimate beneficial owner, we believe it’s actually the government, therefore we want the country to become a director’, which puts them in an impossible situation. They feel they weren’t wanted by the Premier League.
"I hope the fans realise what’s happened, that this is a lot more complicated than it might seem. I want them to understand the whole thing about the directorship, that it would be impossible for a state to become a director. The Premier League made it so hard. It would be unprecedented. No country has ever become a director of a club. It’s ridiculous.
They were saying ‘you know what, we won’t reject you but we won’t approve you either, so we’ll just sit here for month after month’. They could have told us all this before we exchanged. It’s up to the fans now. Because if the fans want this back on then they’re going to have to go to the Premier League and say this isn’t fair."
"The Premier League wanted the country, Saudi, to become a director of the football club. That’s what this is about. They were effectively saying ‘PIF wouldn’t be the ultimate beneficial owner, we believe it’s actually the government, therefore we want the country to become a director’, which puts them in an impossible situation. They feel they weren’t wanted by the Premier League.
"I hope the fans realise what’s happened, that this is a lot more complicated than it might seem. I want them to understand the whole thing about the directorship, that it would be impossible for a state to become a director. The Premier League made it so hard. It would be unprecedented. No country has ever become a director of a club. It’s ridiculous.
They were saying ‘you know what, we won’t reject you but we won’t approve you either, so we’ll just sit here for month after month’. They could have told us all this before we exchanged. It’s up to the fans now. Because if the fans want this back on then they’re going to have to go to the Premier League and say this isn’t fair."
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Flumpo said:
The Saudis are pretty unpleasant, but let’s not pretend this is anything other than the big clubs have blocked this.
What evidence do you have for this assertion. First of all, the PL never blocked it. They may well have done in due course, but the buyers have pulled out due to the delay. Secondly, I understand the main concern of the PL was the Saudi enabled pirating of PL broadcasts for illegal streams. This was more important to them than the appalling human rights abuses, which I think go a bit beyond "pretty unpleasant".Honestly, you lot should be thanking your lucky stars you've dodged this bullet.
A few months ago various sources said 10 clubs had petitioned to block the move. Tottenham and Liverpool were the only clubs who were openly named. It was covered in a few broadsheets.
If you google Tottenham and Liverpool block Newcastle takeover it seems there are numerous papers leading with that again today.
Why do you think Amanda and the others involved would make that up?
The thing is this whole thing has stunk from day 1. I have no idea what the truth is, what makes you certain this didn’t happen?
I have no doubt that other clubs have opposed it. She wouldn't wish to put herself in a position to make that kind of thing up and risk those clubs trying to take her to court over it.
I hope one day we can be ambitious again and f
k over the lot of them. Spurs may do it themselves it they slip further away from Champions league.
I hope one day we can be ambitious again and f
k over the lot of them. Spurs may do it themselves it they slip further away from Champions league. Flumpo said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Flumpo said:
The Saudis are pretty unpleasant, but let’s not pretend this is anything other than the big clubs have blocked this.
What evidence do you have for this assertion. First of all, the PL never blocked it. They may well have done in due course, but the buyers have pulled out due to the delay. Secondly, I understand the main concern of the PL was the Saudi enabled pirating of PL broadcasts for illegal streams. This was more important to them than the appalling human rights abuses, which I think go a bit beyond "pretty unpleasant".Honestly, you lot should be thanking your lucky stars you've dodged this bullet.
A few months ago various sources said 10 clubs had petitioned to block the move. Tottenham and Liverpool were the only clubs who were openly named. It was covered in a few broadsheets.
If you google Tottenham and Liverpool block Newcastle takeover it seems there are numerous papers leading with that again today.
Why do you think Amanda and the others involved would make that up?
The thing is this whole thing has stunk from day 1. I have no idea what the truth is, what makes you certain this didn’t happen?
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Flumpo said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Flumpo said:
The Saudis are pretty unpleasant, but let’s not pretend this is anything other than the big clubs have blocked this.
What evidence do you have for this assertion. First of all, the PL never blocked it. They may well have done in due course, but the buyers have pulled out due to the delay. Secondly, I understand the main concern of the PL was the Saudi enabled pirating of PL broadcasts for illegal streams. This was more important to them than the appalling human rights abuses, which I think go a bit beyond "pretty unpleasant".Honestly, you lot should be thanking your lucky stars you've dodged this bullet.
A few months ago various sources said 10 clubs had petitioned to block the move. Tottenham and Liverpool were the only clubs who were openly named. It was covered in a few broadsheets.
If you google Tottenham and Liverpool block Newcastle takeover it seems there are numerous papers leading with that again today.
Why do you think Amanda and the others involved would make that up?
The thing is this whole thing has stunk from day 1. I have no idea what the truth is, what makes you certain this didn’t happen?
I think we will have to agree to disagree!
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff