The Official Newcastle United Thread

[ajap1979]

Flumpo said:

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.

I can only go off what Amanda s has said and she said the other clubs have petitioned and blocked. She’s not happy

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?

It may well have happened. I just haven't heard it from any other PL club. Why would they be ashamed of it? They aren't blocking it because they are scared of the competition. Fabulously wealthy owners are good for the whole PL. If Newcastle get bought by Bill gates or Jeff Bezos, then fantastic. OK, they might push us (Chelsea) out of the top 4, but they'll bring more fabulous players to the Prem, and i like watching fabulous players. So, if they are blocking it, it's because they don't want a bunch of murderers to be involved. It's hardly something to be ashamed of.

If you genuinely think Tottenham and Liverpool potentially blocked this takeover as they were disgusted by the Saudi governments internal justice system, then fair enough.

I think we will have to agree to disagree!

Yep, load of tosh

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Flumpo said:

If you genuinely think Tottenham and Liverpool potentially blocked this takeover as they were disgusted by the Saudi governments internal justice system, then fair enough.

I think we will have to agree to disagree!

Aren't you disgusted by the thought of them being your owners? That's more to the point.

[Flumpo]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Flumpo said:

If you genuinely think Tottenham and Liverpool potentially blocked this takeover as they were disgusted by the Saudi governments internal justice system, then fair enough.

I think we will have to agree to disagree!

Aren't you disgusted by the thought of them being your owners? That's more to the point.

I genuinely don’t know what i think. We live in a very complicated world. I’m using a phone that was made in a factory in China by modern sanitised slavery, same again with my clothes.

Ive just thrown some gone off fruit out of my fridge, while there are children in some countries starving to death.

I think many of my other unconscious daily actions are far worse than me not objecting to this Saudi take over.

I can sit here and be outraged by their actions, but am I any better accepting and contributing to the rest of the st in the world.

If Liverpool and Tottenham are that concerned about the Saudi regime then have they objected to any sales of merchandise or tv deals?

Why are they taking money from the Chinese government or fans when they have up to 2m Muslims in concentration camps?

I think we all pick what we like and ignore what we don’t. We are all kents and we have to live with it.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Flumpo said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Flumpo said:

If you genuinely think Tottenham and Liverpool potentially blocked this takeover as they were disgusted by the Saudi governments internal justice system, then fair enough.

I think we will have to agree to disagree!

Aren't you disgusted by the thought of them being your owners? That's more to the point.

I genuinely don’t know what i think. We live in a very complicated world. I’m using a phone that was made in a factory in China by modern sanitised slavery, same again with my clothes.

Ive just thrown some gone off fruit out of my fridge, while there are children in some countries starving to death.

I think many of my other unconscious daily actions are far worse than me not objecting to this Saudi take over.

I can sit here and be outraged by their actions, but am I any better accepting and contributing to the rest of the st in the world.

If Liverpool and Tottenham are that concerned about the Saudi regime then have they objected to any sales of merchandise or tv deals?

Why are they taking money from the Chinese government or fans when they have up to 2m Muslims in concentration camps?

I think we all pick what we like and ignore what we don’t. We are all kents and we have to live with it.

I agree with all that. It's not a perfect world, and we all make moral compromises every day. But most neutral observers would agree that to have PIF owning your club, which is the Saudi Royal family, who are the actual people who give direct orders to murder people every day, is going way too far. This lot are miles worse above any other dubious owners we have in the prem. It's not long since they had that dissenting journalist chopped up and disposed of in Turkey.

[ellroy]

Way worse than Sheffield Utd, who are owned by? Oh, yes part of the KSA royal family.

Way worse than Man Utd, whose longest sponsor is? Part of the KSA.

Get to fk.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

ellroy said:

Way worse than Sheffield Utd, who are owned by? Oh, yes part of the KSA royal family.

Way worse than Man Utd, whose longest sponsor is? Part of the KSA.

Get to fk.

Seriously??? Get to fk indeed!

SUFC are owned by a minor member of the Saudi Royal family, with about £250m to his name, which is nothing in Saudi terms. He's a businessman and a qualified engineer, with absolutely no evidence that he's been involved in any misdeeds. He's the Saudi equivalent of one of Prince Edwards children.

Man U are sponsored by the main KSA Telecom firm, amounst others. The are a company who run phone sysyems.

If you want to convince yourself that that's the same as being owned by actual murderers, the actual people who give the orders for hundreds of their own citizens to be executed every year, for journalists to be kidnapped and chopped up into pieces, then you go ahead. Knock yourself out.

Fortunately there are many decent NUFC fans who don't share your view.

[ACCYSTAN]

Be honest,
Spurs and Liverpool were acting out of self interest not wanting the extra competition.

[TX1]

This was never about politics, this was about the PL proving to us how they favour a few clubs and nobody on the outside could possibly come in and unsettle the clique they have going.
The amount of money the Saudi's have was going to rock the boat and as far as the PL go that would not do.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

TX1 said:

This was never about politics, this was about the PL proving to us how they favour a few clubs and nobody on the outside could possibly come in and unsettle the clique they have going.
The amount of money the Saudi's have was going to rock the boat and as far as the PL go that would not do.

Nice attempt to play the downtrodden victims, but the actual facts don't bear that out. Chelsea were never one of the "big" clubs, but no one blocked the takeover that made them so. Same with Man City. No one stood in the way. If you think Liverpool and Spurs would get anywhere trying to block an NUFC takeover by someone even half reputable, you are dreaming.

The PL is a product. It sutis them to have hugely rich owners of the PL clubs. And whilst they aren't all going to be angels, there are limits on just how disgusting club owners are allowed to be. And the KSA ruling family cross that line and them some.

[TX1]

That is my opinion and if you disagree that is fine and you know what you can do.

[Adam B]

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.

Wow think you may be taking the conspiracies a bit too far now. There is a lot of disquiet about supplying further arms to Saudi (business may still win) given their appalling human rights record + Yemen + Khashoggi.

Allowing the Saudis to buy a cultural crown jewel like a big EPL club is rather different from not taking an Uber because they bought shares in that US company.

My 3 NUFC mates had decidedly mixed views of the takeover

Edited by Adam B on Saturday 1st August 18:37

[ellroy]

Frankly laughable from him.

Chelski and the Russians? Invading countries, supporting the cuddly Syrians, shooting down airliners? Hypocrital tts.

Arsenal? Sponsored by Rwanda. Cheeky bit of genocide? Silence.

It goes on. Get back in your box nasty northerners, we like our closed shop and don’t want you lot gatecrashing the party.

[Adam B]

Wonder why only 2 of the 10 objecting clubs were named

[ACCYSTAN]

Adam B said:

Wonder why only 2 of the 10 objecting clubs were named

They where the ring leaders, sane way they where both the ring leaders for the Man City Europe ban,

[Deathmole]

Some right tin foil hat activity in here gotta be the victims.

[Flumpo]

Deathmole said:

Some right tin foil hat activity in here gotta be the victims.

I don’t think there is any talk of victims at all.

I consortium including the Saudi investment fund tried to buy a club. The prem league said there was no question marks over the awful human rights offences by the Saudi government. It doesn’t and isn’t any part of the fit and proper persons test. It bloody should be as well as a host of other things that make a handful or more prem league owners unfit and proper owners. If it isn’t, and it wasn’t and issue.

The woman leading the consortium bid has blamed the prem league and 10 clubs with Liverpool and Tottenham being the ring leaders.

This was not based on objections to gays being persecuted or executed or tortured or slavery in Saudi. It was because they don’t want more competition for the champions league spots. It’s purely based on money.

Those are the facts as presented by the woman involved in the takeover.

Is that true, only those involved really know.

As it stands anything anyone else is posting is a conspiracy theory and quite frankly it’s ridiculous. Suggesting Liverpool and Tottenham were not objecting, then saying they were objecting based on human rights grounds is farcical.

Are the Saudis scum bags unfit to own a prem league club? Yes, yes they are unfit, but that isn’t part of the test and isn’t why the prem league pissed about playing games.

[BrabusMog]

Flumpo said:

I don’t think there is any talk of victims at all.

I consortium including the Saudi investment fund tried to buy a club. The prem league said there was no question marks over the awful human rights offences by the Saudi government. It doesn’t and isn’t any part of the fit and proper persons test. It bloody should be as well as a host of other things that make a handful or more prem league owners unfit and proper owners. If it isn’t, and it wasn’t and issue.

The woman leading the consortium bid has blamed the prem league and 10 clubs with Liverpool and Tottenham being the ring leaders.

This was not based on objections to gays being persecuted or executed or tortured or slavery in Saudi. It was because they don’t want more competition for the champions league spots. It’s purely based on money.

Those are the facts as presented by the woman involved in the takeover.

Is that true, only those involved really know.

As it stands anything anyone else is posting is a conspiracy theory and quite frankly it’s ridiculous. Suggesting Liverpool and Tottenham were not objecting, then saying they were objecting based on human rights grounds is farcical.

Are the Saudis scum bags unfit to own a prem league club? Yes, yes they are unfit, but that isn’t part of the test and isn’t why the prem league pissed about playing games.

Seems to me that the PL just didn't want to make the decision and longed it until the Saudi's gave in and walked away. I'd not take any notice of Twig, he argues with himself when he brushes his teeth - always takes a contrary stance

[Deathmole]

Flumpo said:

I don’t think there is any talk of victims at all.

I consortium including the Saudi investment fund tried to buy a club. The prem league said there was no question marks over the awful human rights offences by the Saudi government. It doesn’t and isn’t any part of the fit and proper persons test. It bloody should be as well as a host of other things that make a handful or more prem league owners unfit and proper owners. If it isn’t, and it wasn’t and issue.

The woman leading the consortium bid has blamed the prem league and 10 clubs with Liverpool and Tottenham being the ring leaders.

This was not based on objections to gays being persecuted or executed or tortured or slavery in Saudi. It was because they don’t want more competition for the champions league spots. It’s purely based on money.

Those are the facts as presented by the woman involved in the takeover.

Is that true, only those involved really know.

As it stands anything anyone else is posting is a conspiracy theory and quite frankly it’s ridiculous. Suggesting Liverpool and Tottenham were not objecting, then saying they were objecting based on human rights grounds is farcical.

Are the Saudis scum bags unfit to own a prem league club? Yes, yes they are unfit, but that isn’t part of the test and isn’t why the prem league pissed about playing games.

Any proof of this? The woman trying to broker the deal doesn't sound like an awfully independent source of information to me.

Seems to me like there's desperate attempts to make it out that NUFC is indeed the victim of some vast conspiracy to keep 'em down, check Twitter out - some proper swivel eyed loon carry ons.

Edited by Deathmole on Saturday 1st August 19:30

[Flumpo]

Deathmole said:

Flumpo said:

I don’t think there is any talk of victims at all.

I consortium including the Saudi investment fund tried to buy a club. The prem league said there was no question marks over the awful human rights offences by the Saudi government. It doesn’t and isn’t any part of the fit and proper persons test. It bloody should be as well as a host of other things that make a handful or more prem league owners unfit and proper owners. If it isn’t, and it wasn’t and issue.

The woman leading the consortium bid has blamed the prem league and 10 clubs with Liverpool and Tottenham being the ring leaders.

This was not based on objections to gays being persecuted or executed or tortured or slavery in Saudi. It was because they don’t want more competition for the champions league spots. It’s purely based on money.

Those are the facts as presented by the woman involved in the takeover.

Is that true, only those involved really know.

As it stands anything anyone else is posting is a conspiracy theory and quite frankly it’s ridiculous. Suggesting Liverpool and Tottenham were not objecting, then saying they were objecting based on human rights grounds is farcical.

Are the Saudis scum bags unfit to own a prem league club? Yes, yes they are unfit, but that isn’t part of the test and isn’t why the prem league pissed about playing games.

Any proof of this? The woman trying to broker the deal doesn't sound like an awfully independent source of information to me.

Seems to me like there's desperate attempts to make it out that NUFC is indeed the victim of some vast conspiracy to keep 'em down, check Twitter out - some proper swivel eyed loon carry ons.

Edited by Deathmole on Saturday 1st August 19:30

Any proof Liverpool and Tottenham don’t want more competition for champions league spots?

You seem to be well and truly down a rabbit hole.

I also don’t have a copy of Obama’s birth certificate I’m afraid.

Edited by Flumpo on Saturday 1st August 19:37

[Adam B]

Deathmole said:

Any proof of this? The woman trying to broker the deal doesn't sound like an awfully independent source of information to me.

Was thinking that, wonder how many millions she gets if a deal is successful