Polarboy

Maybe you're purely taking the piss, fair enough if you are, I can take it, but if you actually believe I'm in any way supportive of the Saudi regime you are wrong. I was merely pointing out that there was a deeper context to what was happening with his wife's letters, and indeed his actions when he was alive. There has been a widespread tendency to paint Khashoggi and his wife as morally pure in contrast to the Saudi regime. Now given that he was murdered you may say that whether he held morally despicable views is besides the point, but good journalism furnishes people with all the facts. It's not as if you can accuse the NYT's of right wing propaganda. The old, I'm going to assume any caveats you've written are bullshit with my mind reading ability.

He wanted the Saudi regime to be taken down, but his alternative was not a liberal democracy, albeit he may have wanted the Saudi public to vote in a Muslim Brotherhood type of political Islam, but those two things appear, to me at least, to be incompatible, as in democracy and the ideology of TMB. He had been a member of the Muslim Brotherhood in earlier life, supported their style of political Islam, and indeed was thought of as one of them by them even after he died. He was also friends with and worked with Azzam Tamimi, a British-Palestinian academic, on at least one political movement that sought to have an Islamist party elected in Algeria. Tamimi's known for extreme views including staunch support of Hamas, and stating that he supported suicide bombings, and indeed would blow himself up if he could get inside Israel. Khashoggi was also a close friend of Erdogan, as also written in NYT in another article, who advocated very strongly after his death for an investigation into his murder. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/14/world/middleeast/jamal-khashoggi-saudi-arabia.html

Been reading about Jamal Khashoggi and the views and allegiances he held when he was alive. I would never advocate what happened to him happening to anyone, except for maybe rapists and paedo's, but the guy was an Islamist, antisemitic headcase, and it's very unlikely that his wife doesn't hold similar views. So yes, an authoritarian regime murdering a journalist is very, very bad, but the guy was more of an activist for Islamist ideology than he was a journalist, and certainly not as innocent as some would like you to believe. Of course this isn't to dismiss his wife's right to protest his killing, regardless of what abhorrent views she may hold, and he held when he was alive.

Kieran Maguire the football finance expert has weighed in on this, probably non-issue, of piracy being linked to Saudi. He basically said that there isn't any clear evidence linking the two parties, and that even if there are suspicions, it would make more sense for the premier league to give approval in order to get the Saudi's to bid for the rights and stop any piracy. https://www.nufcblog.com/2020/05/13/football-finance-lecturer-weighs-in-on-nufc-takeover/

If it's not mentioned in the test as you say, and this article is saying it is, then the validity of the entire article has to be called into question. Can't say I would take the word of a journalist who can't even get basic facts straight.

Hopefully it's much ado about nothing, but the guardian are reporting that a legal document that supposedly provides a direct link between the Saudi government and BeoutQ, the channel the pirated sport is/was shown on in Saudi, has according to them been passed onto the premier league in the last 24 hours. I would presume that any such document would have been found during the court case that Bein sports or whoever it was took out against the Saudi's and lost. Again hopefully it's just a last minute futile attempt to scupper the deal with little basis in fact. Even squeakier bum time. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/may/11/new-legal-documents-raise-fresh-questions-over-newcastle-takeover-deal-saudi-arabia-premier-league

Everybody has probably seen it, but NUFC.com have stated that the takeover will go through before the end of this week. It's significant obviously because NUFC.com don't usually speculate without having solid information to back up their posts.

Why should he be applauded for anything when he's very likely not acting out of any personal moral code, and is just saying what's most convenient in terms of trying to save his own job.

The freedom he'd likely get with us should be an attractive pro in our favour. Then again we don't know who they'll get as director of football and exactly how much input they will have. I agree with others that as long as Woodward is pulling the strings, very slowly, at Man U it's a poisoned chalice. Ultimately though we don't know what he's thinking, and whether he'd rather the instant prestige and glittered history of one of the elite European clubs.

Exactly. And I can't remember who said it in the press, but I agree that it's not a forgone conclusion at all that Poch would sign on the dotted line. His name has been mentioned in the same breath as the top European clubs. Now maybe that's just paper talk or his agent putting stuff out for him, but he did get Spurs to a Champions League final on a relatively tight net spend. It's a tricky enough situation for him. He could wait until next year and a job could open up at Man U, Real, Bayern, even Man City given there's been rumours of unrest with Guardiola. Of course if he waits too long people soon forget your achievements. So he could have a risky wait, or he could start a new building project as opposed to being at a club that's already at a high level in all aspects.

Have no idea how reliable le10sport are, but they're saying that talks between Poch and the new owners are at an advanced stage. In fairness both Sky and Guillem Balague has said that Poch is definitely the number one target, and Balague at least is usually pretty reliable, so it's not that big a stretch. https://sportslens.com/report-mauricio-pochettino-is-very-close-to-signing-deal-to-become-new-newcastle-united-manager/296065/

Yeah, I'd probably get over it after the third or fourth premier league title like. Given that Strawberry place has been sold I wouldn't mind if the Saudis built a new fuck off 100,000+ seater state of the art stadium. They can name it death to all infidels then if they like

If I was a Barca fan and they basically phased the renaming of the stadium starting with a charity, then to a money making sponsor, I'd be livid. Renaming the Camp Nou is a fucking travesty. Edit. Why not just rename the Sistine Chapel, Vatican Airlines Chapel.

It's a lot easier to brand a stadium when it's a new one. I'd say the Citeh owners would have had to think twice about renaming Maine Road. I can't see Staveley wanting to rock the boat with us, and no doubt she'll know how badly Fatley briefly renaming St. James went. To answer your question though it would take more than would be seen as reasonable, or allowable in terms of sponsorship, as in it would need to be 100m+. Edit. I should say relatively new stadium. The City of Manchester Stadium was about three or four years old when it was renamed the Etihad. But obviously it didn't really have any history that would make the feelings of nostalgia too great to overcome.

James Ayles from the Daily Mail has said that Newcastle fans are "increasingly in favour" of Steve Bruce staying on. The context of the article is that the players, knowing that Bruce will likely be given the rest of the season at least, will try to keep him in a job from their performances. So the context of the article seems to subsequently be implying that Newcastle fans want him to stay beyond the rest of this season. Have I missed something lads?

You just have to be careful to not get a yeast infection from your raising agent.

To entertain your theory for a second, because I can't say I've seen evidence of what you're saying about Liverpool, but then I haven't really looked, it could be a connection between Liverpool and Socialism. Liverpool as a city is obviously a Labour stronghold and has some radical left wing traditions. That Liverpool is still a Socialist club a la Shankly's era is fucking ludicrous, but some of their fans still like to believe so. Journalists are also by in large at least left wing if not far left, so they might think they are making some political point by amplifying Liverpool, at the same time they are criticising Newcastle's prospective owners. Although that Socialists would presumably think their tradition isn't also dripping in blood is beyond delusional. Apologies for getting political in this thread, but the response called for it

Firstly fuck the Sun. Secondly I wouldn't be surprised at all if the premier have politely made it clear that they want the Saudis to sort their piracy issue if they want to be cleared. And lastly I highly doubt the Sun knows any more than us, or have actually got an inside track that's explicitly told them that the premier are considering blocking it. As has been said it's very unlikely that Staveley, the Saudi's etc didn't take the piracy issue into consideration before starting this process, let alone giving Ashley 17million quid.

I think there's a lot of guess work going on, as per usual, with regard to when this thing will be announced, and who the next manager will be. Caulkin, who seems to be the most reliable source, has said that while the owners may have ideas of who they want, they haven't even drawn up an official list yet let alone thought about how much they are going to offer Poch. As for the takeover announcement, anyone who can count to 30 can guess that it will be around now that it will be announced, given we know it went to the premier league on the 9th. I was going to say it must be great being a football journo given you can just guess what you think is most likely, be right some of the time, and rarely have any comeback, but that's really just most journalists these days.

Arseless?

Which is why I wouldn't want them. Not all players are of the mentality that they don't care where they go, as long as the wages are better than the aforementioned established elite. If that was the case there would be more top players playing in China. There are still players who love the sport and have ambition. As I said I'd rather we followed a model similar to Dortmund and Leipzig and invest in youth, and make astute signings that aren't always obvious to other clubs with perhaps less knowledgeable scouting staff. It's undeniable that Liverpool, as I've said, have been very clever in who they've signed. Of course players will also take big wages as well just like anyone else would. Again the facts are that we realistically won't be able to just start bidding for the same players Man City, Real etc are bidding for right away regardless of the money we throw at it, which will be tempered by FFP rules in any case. We'll need to build ourselves up to a level that is more attractive, and put the right people in charge of making the decisions so people can see what sort of project it is we are trying to build. Who the manager is going to be will of course have a big influence on who we can convince to join us.

It's not about the amount being spent, I just think it's more sustainable in ways over than cash being spent over a long period if you are laying a strong foundation. It also lessens the possibility of the club buying a bunch of mercenaries who only care about their wages. As for Van Dijk and Allison, Van Dijk was bought off Southampton, and Allison was bought off Roma. Obviously Roma have a much higher pedigree than Southampton, but they are still a step down from the elite of Real, Barca, Liverpool etc. So yes they were expensive but for the same money there were more obvious choices at the time. And I did concede they were at the expensive end, and that those types of signings would pretty far down the track for us even if they weren't bought off one of the biggest clubs in Europe.

Fekir off Betis, Cavani off PSG, Donny van de Beek off Ajax, a few young players who aren't established yet, and I'm sure some others I'm missing. Personally I hope we don't go the route of signing players who are established great players, for ridiculous wages, but who are the wrong side of thirty looking for little else than a lucrative final contract. I'd rather we built up more slowly if need be and invest in our facilities, youth and scouting. Although I do think there will be opportunities for players of the calibre of Fekir. Players who aren't quite grabbing the attention of elite of Europe, but are still great players who could potentially be great in the premier. We just need to look to Liverpool and the way in which they've operated in the market. If you look at the core of their team i.e. Salah, Mane, Robertson, Allison, Van Dijk etc, they weren't bought off Real, Barca etc and thought of as world beaters, they were just very astute signings, albeit at the higher end of expensive in Van Dijk and Allison's cases. I've said it before but the Dortmund, RB Leipzig models are great blueprints to use, and then when we build up enough we can try to sign the final pieces of the jigsaw like Liverpool did with Van Dijk and Allison. As I've been doing I will just add the caveat that this is all assuming that the sale goes through, I don't want to jinx it now

Unsurprisingly half the YouTube comments are asking who the girl with the hoop earrings in the chorus is.

Transcript of what the other "journos" on the SS had to say. https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11678/11979008/newcastle-takeover-the-sunday-supplement-view-on-saudi-based-consortium-amid-scrutiny