Polarboy

SUPPORT THE TEAM NOT THE REGIME!!!!!!!!, - whispering in the background - it was pretty nice of them to spend all that money on the team and the city like.

I'm not convinced young players nowadays care about the history of the club they are joining all that much. It might be nice to be able to try and dazzle them with your trophy room when you're showing them around, but at the end of the day they likely really only care about how much money your are offering them, who the coach is and if he's got the ability to improve them, and who they will be playing with, in that order.

The thing about Merson is that being annoyed or upset that he's said something stupid, is like getting upset with someone in their 80's for shitting themselves.

Move into your car and dumpster dive for food, sorted.

Twitter isn't reality, and there's plenty on there that don't want it to happen for various reasons, most of which are in some way self serving.

Given that we only really need a win or two, would you rather Bruce was sacked straight away, or just give him the last few game of this season. I've wasn't a fan of Bruce before he came and my opinion hasn't really changed that much, but in fairness if we were in the bottom three right now this takeover likely wouldn't be happening, fingers crossed. So perhaps if only just to let us get our ducks in a row with the next guy, and to show a bit of professionalism, I think we should probably just give him the remaining games before sacking him and giving him forty lashes for being such a moany twat in the media.

I wonder will these sanctimonious journalists be giving up their Dubai apartments and or holidays any time soon.

Speaking of self righteous this is a conversation I had with someone on football365 if anyone is interested, you probably aren't to be fair Edit. I'm Kevin in the small chance there is any confusion. Sam Graham Although I have no connection with them, I have always had a soft spot for Newcastle United (a romantic love in the 90’s, perhaps more just pity recently). If they become Saudi owned, all of that good will will evaporate. Kevin McLaughlin And which institutions and governments do you think aren't swimming with money from Middle Eastern, Russian, Chinese etc sources. I'm afraid there's no way of getting away from it. The reality is that moral hand wringing in the face of that is sanctimonious. edited Chris Gill No. There is nothing sanctimonious about it. Using a faux intellectual macroeconomic argument as dispensation for immorality is to simply condone it. It is not clever, nor is it right. Kevin McLaughlin "It's not clever, nor is it right." Did you have a wistful glance into a mirror when you were writing that? This conversation reminds me of moral busybodies and supposed activists who get up on their soap box for anything, and when you point out they have an iPhone they're like, we still have to, like, live in the world man. And it is sanctimonious to be so personally moralistic and black and white about it, because you and everyone else is connected to and enjoying some aspect of society that is funded by such monies. Chris Gill Things become less black and white by degrees of separation. The money spent by perpetrators of evil permeates society at all levels, well done captain obvious. So we are all indirectly compliant and therefore morality and bare minimums cease to exist? Nice try. Still not clever. Still not right. Kevin McLaughlin Morality still exists and so does reality. And please tell me exactly how morally culpable Newcastle fans should be for Saudi human rights abuses should they complete the deal to buy the club. I assume you're English, so by virtue of living under that government and taking advantage of the NHS, national parks, roads etc, how culpable are you for British arms sales to the Saudis among other highly morally dubious decisions? The 5G deal with Chinese for another example. Chris Gill Not English. Newcastle supporters who are in favour of their club being owned by Saudi abusers of human rights are indeed culpable. Those who are opposed are not at all sanctimonious. And the British people do, in theory at least, have the democratic opportunity to object to dubious decisions (or endorse them as is their want). Do they have an alternative to national healthcare? Are those who disagree with government decisions morally bound to withdraw from society as protest? The crimes of yesterday do not justify those of tomorrow. And portraying the "taking advantage" of national services and infrastructure as culpability is simply laughable. It is so indirect as to be virtually non-existent. Your arguments are simplistic absurdities. Kevin McLaughlin It's not a case of being in favour of the Saudi's taking over, it's what appears to be happening whether we like it or not. I'm sure if you were to ask the vast majority of Newcastle fans they'd much rather much more altruistic and moral financial backers, but what is it that you think Newcastle fans are morally duty bound to do? Are we supposed to stop supporting the club? Should we be out protesting the Saudi's every day and night? And once again I'll ask you, exactly how morally culpable are Newcastle fans for Saudi human rights abuses, if they continue to support the one club in their city that they've grown up supporting? As for my arguments they are only marginally more absurd than making Newcastle fans morally culpable for the crimes the Saudi's commit, by continuing to support a team that they had no part in selling to them in the first place. And the point I was making with my examples was that there are things that happen which you have no control over but which make you party to immorality. To restate it one more time, by your logic above as long as you don't actively endorse the immoral overlords, and aren't directly taking advantage of their blood money, it's unreasonable to place too much blame on yourself. Chris Gill No. Your point was that having a moral objection to human rights abusing owners was sanctimonious. It isn't. Tw t. Kevin McLaughlin Lol, the name calling has come out. You know what they say about the people who are first to hurl insults in a discussion. And no I did not say or imply that objecting to human rights abuses was sanctimonious. Although it definitely can be dependant on the tone, content and obvious aim of the person who's voicing concerns, i.e sanctimonious moral grandstanding to make themselves feel superior while achieving nothing else. What I said was that it's sanctimonious to be so black and white when stating what you think Newcastle fans should be feeling about it because it's hypocritical, given all our hands are dirty to some extent in a world where morally questionable money is invested in every part of our lives, and most things we buy are made by virtual or actual slave labour. I've repeatedly said it's perfectly reasonable to bring it up, but you at least have to concede that it's not an easy situation for Newcastle fans, nor are we in anyway complicit in Saudi human rights abuses regardless of what happens. And once again you've failed to answer any of my questions.

Yeah, I had to read it again there. I think what he was trying to say was that we shouldn't trust the Saudi's because they didn't immediately crumble and pay Ashley's overvaluation of the club. My earlier assumption that he was saying that the price wasn't agreed is likely wrong. Samuel and I think a few others have had this retarded logic as well. It's like why don't people who are stupidly rich just spunk money on something that's overpriced. Well I think you'll find people who get that rich don't overpay for things, if nothing else than for the fact that you need to be seen as savvy when it comes to negotiations. And IIRC didn't someone say that given the inevitable economic downturn the club was closer to 250 million in value. If that's the case the Saudi's are still overpaying. Edit. Oh and Samuel goes on about the process being torturous, and of course doesn't even entertain the notion that it was Ashley's fault that it's been that way. Top notch journalisming from Samuel as usual.

Here's an article from the Guardian back in 2013 when a Saudi prince bought half of Sheffield United. Not even one mention of human rights. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/sep/03/sheffield-united-saudi-arabia-co-owner

Martin Samuel, with Ashley's hand up his arse more than likely, wittering on about the Saudi's haggling over the difference between Ashley's 340Million valuation and the 300 we've seen reported. This article worries me given that Samuel is seen as Ashely's minion. I don't have an adequate description for what should happen to Ashley if he fucks this up at the last minute for an extra 40 million. I was under the assumption that the price had been agreed? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8227639/MARTIN-SAMUEL-Toon-takeover-ringing-loudest-alarm-bells-Newcastle-United-sale-looms.html

Clearly he does want us to fail. What kind of numpty would think Bruce should be in charge of attracting high quality players to a club. I don't think even Carragher is that dense.

Having a chat with some twat on football365 who reckons that any Newcastle fan who continues to support the club if it's sold to the Saudi's, is at least partially culpable in their human rights abuses. I've pointed out to him that unless you are deaf, dumb, blind, and a hermit in the wilderness you are taking advantage of and enjoying media, infastructure etc that has been funded by Chinese, Middle Eastern, Russian etc money. If we fail the morality test then so does he and the vast majority of planet earth.

Independent saying the fit and proper tests could be completed as soon as some time next week, maybe as some have suggested they've been going on for at least a week already. And that the sale could be fully completed by the end of April. https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/newcastle-united-takeover-saudi-arabia-mike-ashley-amanda-staveley-epl-a9469211.html

And the problem is that "edgy" and or controversial opinions are incentivised in this click bait nightmare we're living in. Never has it been more profitable to be a moronic bloat, i.e the entire Talksport presenting staff.

See Carragher was speaking nonsense about the potential takeover. He reckons that regardless of how much money we have backing us up we'll struggle to even break into the top six. So Leicester can come from nowhere to win the league, which granted is never likely to happen again, but they are now currently on course to finish top four for the second time, but that is supposedly close to impossible for Newcastle. Look it's going to take a fair few seasons to build ourselves up again, but if the right people in terms of football director, commercial executives, board members, manager etc are put in place there's no reason we can't continually grow. Maybe we can't spend like Man City did and Chelsea did when Abramovic first came in, but depending on how loose they are going to be with FFP rules post Covid, it might not take us that long to bring in the right type of players. Enough money and the right manager with a good rep behind him to attract players is half the battle. In any case I'd like to see us built up with up and coming players like the Dortmund and or Leipzig model. Maybe I am being a bit naive, but then again maybe Carragher just doesn't want more competition for Liverpool.

Keep - Dubravka, Schar, ASM, Almiron, and Lejeune who I think edges Schar as our best centre half when fully fit. Hoy the rest into a bin along with granny face out the back of St James. In all seriousness of course we'll also have to keep other players like Fernandez, who hasn't let us down, and a few others given that you can only rebuild a squad over a fair few windows. Having said that into the bin along with the shite direct hoarding with Carroll, Shelvey who's not athletic enough to be a top six midfield player and a bit of a mardy twat, Gayle, Muto, Krath, Darlow, Elliot, Yedlin, Sterry, Saviet, Atsu and Colback.

I'd like to know for sure sooner than later obviously, but how nice would it be if the lockdown being lifted coincided with the official announcement of the club sale.

Apparently some more paperwork linked to the consortium has been uploaded to the companies house website. It represents the Saudi's part in all this. https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/further-companies-house-activity-linked-18097793

Have Citeh really gotten that much criticism with regard to UAE's human rights record? I can't say I've ever seen that much, at least coming from the sports pages. It seems like we've already gotten a lot given we haven't even been bloody sold yet.

Allegri's odds of being the next manager, should the takeover happen, have dropped. I mean for all that's worth, but as I've said before there's no way you can turn your nose up at Allegri. He's at least Rafa's equal when it comes to tactical nouse for one thing.

When I think low rent I think cheap, low morals, and just generally shoddy in every aspect, obviously apart from their bank balances. I don't see how you could get lower rent in those aspects than Ashley when you see how he conducts himself and his businesses.

A low rent Ashley? Is it even possible to be lower rent than Ashley?

That would be like feeding your prized stallion mad cows diseased brain matter mixed with a bit of covid.

He already has a plan drawn up for training ground improvements doesn't he? Or had to be more precise. I think he'd be great in terms of restructuring the club and getting it into the shape it would need to be for a top four push at the very least. Then perhaps we could go after a manager who's more used to stepping into something that's more high level. Of course with regard to the training ground plan it was probably drawn up with what Ashley might have given them in terms of budget, so it's hopefully less than useless now.