Never heard one called that before
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Christ.
Substitute LGBT in your sentences there with any race/minority/disability and read it again and see how you feel about what you’ve just written.
Is this for real?
Last I checked Qatar weren’t threatening to nuke everyone on the planet, starting the first major war on European soil since World War 2 and engaging in genocidal practices against a nation of millions.
What a stupid post.
Think it was with some, others it is not liking being told what to do by bureaucrats. Why let them tell us what to do when we have our own incompetent idiots to do it.
I can not possibly get my head around thinking Russia as a country shouldn’t be allowed to own a football club because of moral purposes but allowing Qatar to do it. It just baffles me. Both countries do not align with my values whatsoever and I’d hate either being involved.
I think it’s mental to say Russia as a country are disgusting and shouldn’t be involved in the Prem but let’s welcome Qatar yes. That apparently shows that morals ARE important but only up to a certain point that doesn’t include excluding homosexuals and seeing women as equal to men. Or killing migrants.
Just a thought..
If that Qatari group can’t provide a larger value for United than Ineos, are they really going to be as free spending as people think? Their private takeover of Malaga wasn’t..
It also comes across so far that (in a business sense) Ineos have completely outsmarted them. There are very credible ways Jassim could buy the club now and then complete the 100% takeover down the line
I still think there’s potentially another twist and we might get breaking news of a revised Qatar bid this week. But if not, I think the above is valid
If that Qatari group can’t provide a larger value for United than Ineos, are they really going to be as free spending as people think? Their private takeover of Malaga wasn’t..
It also comes across so far that (in a business sense) Ineos have completely outsmarted them. There are very credible ways Jassim could buy the club now and then complete the 100% takeover down the line
I still think there’s potentially another twist and we might get breaking news of a revised Qatar bid this week. But if not, I think the above is valid
I can agree to that. It's just boring reading over and over that you must be a racist if you voted to leave anyway, didn't thread.
Just get rid of religion, a lot of the problems in the world are derived by people following books written by MEN a long time ago. Actually written well after the events, so was it the words of Jesus, God or Mohammed or the ideas of the people who wrote them.
I’d prefer Ineos and that’s because I think that states owning clubs has been bad for the game. Not a fan of the ‘if you can’t beat em join em’ argument. The choice is be state owned or not be state owned and I’d prefer not.
What matters next is that the club is run as a sporting organisation and with sporting principles. We’ve made a good start with ETH and I just hope that the club will move in the right direction with the Glazers losing control.
What matters next is that the club is run as a sporting organisation and with sporting principles. We’ve made a good start with ETH and I just hope that the club will move in the right direction with the Glazers losing control.
This is a good way to derail the thread.
There's literally a thread on religion in the general forum.
ffs we’re not discussing the distribution of grain rations to famine victims here.This generation seem to love the word Racist. Never known a word so freely banded about ever! - Sad times we live in and it’s getting worse unfortunately
Might be likely it isn't state-owned and it's just a private individual getting funding via loans from banks/his father.
There was a report in this thread earlier about a bank collapsing that they had ties with.
I want Ineos to win this but the Glazers are using Jim's bid as leverage to get Qatar to offer more, and I think they'll probably get what they want
Taking football out of the equation Qataris have succeeded in bringing their country onto the world stage. They will equate that to success.
If Qatar managed to get Spurs they would be like City on steroids, don't forget that once upon a time City were very Cityish...Spurs with a new stadium and having the London premium would see Utd slip further down the preferred destination for top footballers.I’d love Qatar to buy Spurs. Would be fun to see them pump in billions and still be Spursy. They’d be as successful as PSG
Don't think they are. They're likely just delaying the process a bit trying to get the best possible deal from both parties and not solely one.
You've taken my point completely the wrong way. You're mixing up LGBT awareness with choice. My feelings towards the LGBT community and the Qatar bid are two totally different things.
I've nothing against the LGBT community whatsoever, I have friends and family who are members.
I'm simply pointing out that if they don't like Qatari ownership then they have a choice to voice their feelings or stop supporting the club. But my point still stands when comparing their views with millions of others. Why should we not have Qatari ownership if millions of fans want it but a minority few don't?
If I don't like the Purple chocolate in a box of Quality Street because it contains a nut and gives me an allergy, should Nestle remove it just for me when millions of others love it?
If I were in the LGBTQ community and I didn't want Qatari ownership then think outside the box and make their voices heard.
If the Qataris take over then how about changing their banner in the stadium to
LGBTQataris Out!
With a little bit of thought they could actually get their message across to the owners easier than they think.
It's not even the right word, xenophobic would be more appropriate.
https://theathletic.com/4515644/2023/05/13/solskjaer-haaland-united-4m-glazers/
“It needs to be done,” said Solskjaer. “Old Trafford is neglected. The training ground has been neglected. We need to catch up with the other teams.”
Without saying it categorically, Solskjaer gave the impression he was supportive of Sir Jim Ratcliffe rather than the Qatari bidders, whom he did not mention. Ratcliffe is the owner of Nice in Ligue 1 and, though it has been kept a secret until now, Solskjaer revealed that the French club had tried to appoint him as manager.
Yet Solskjaer did not sound convinced Ratcliffe would end up with full control of the club. “I’m not sure he can get the whole lot,” he said. “I think he wants only 51 per cent; it’s a difficult one.”
“It needs to be done,” said Solskjaer. “Old Trafford is neglected. The training ground has been neglected. We need to catch up with the other teams.”
Without saying it categorically, Solskjaer gave the impression he was supportive of Sir Jim Ratcliffe rather than the Qatari bidders, whom he did not mention. Ratcliffe is the owner of Nice in Ligue 1 and, though it has been kept a secret until now, Solskjaer revealed that the French club had tried to appoint him as manager.
Yet Solskjaer did not sound convinced Ratcliffe would end up with full control of the club. “I’m not sure he can get the whole lot,” he said. “I think he wants only 51 per cent; it’s a difficult one.”
How would you propose to get religious beliefs out of billions of people's hearts and minds?
yeah I agree with that but realistically they'll be aware that Qatar can afford to pay way over the odds compared to SJR
so I think this delay is waiting for Qatar to fold
Only fools blame all the problems in England on Brexit.
Was the UK some kind of paradise before it left the European Union?
No, definitely not.
Has much happened that affected the British economy negatively since the UK left the European Union that is not due to Brexit?
Yes.
The big problems in England can't be blamed on Brexit so get real.
Who is this Radcliffe you are talking about?
Wow. You need to wake the feck up.
There's not much that makes me cringe quite as much as someone casually throwing the word racist around without understanding the meaning or significance of it. The frequency in which it's been used in this thread really has put me off viewing it too often
You can't can you really. The problems started hundreds of years ago when everybody tried to convince everybody else that their religion was right. What needs to happens is all religions move into the 21st century and change their attitudes. Some have, or sections of them, some just refuse.
“When one finds oneself in a hole, one should stop digging!”
You are having a nightmare in this thread, and you need to stop. Comparing the plight of repressed LGBT people around the world to you having a nut allergy is beyond ridiculous. Think hard before you post again.
Because it's living and real.
This generation of people to its credit are actually now brave enough to speak out. My grandfather's and fathers' generation were in fear to speak out against their white overlords and colonialists.
Last edited:
Which implies that he is a racist, as you used his apparent stance on Brexit as a way to put him in a negative manner with the following chain of reasoning: SJR was a Brexit backer --> Brexit was rooted in racism --> SJR might very well be a racist.
Not sure why you tell me to go to the right forum for my question either. You were the one who brought it up. Please don't angle it as I am not on topic when I am just asking you to clarify what he has said or done for you to acuse, or at least suspect, him of being a racist as that is one of the worst acusations you can throw at someone. If you want to clarify what you mean in the apropriate forum, you have my permission to tag me in that post.
In regards to his stands (on all matters of importance), I am sure he justs acts in the way which he judges will suit himself, his loved ones and his enterprises the best, as virtually all people do in every situation, regardless of nationality, ethnic identity, political affinity or whatever.
I am not a SJR supporter btw. I don't want him to own the club.
well that’s me told.The main reason I wanted the Qataris is the beautiful thobes they'd probably make compulsory to wear at OT
It's amusing to see people who spent 16 years doing nothing to remove the Glazers talking about boycotts and mass protests because their preferred bidder didn't buy the club.
You talk about the moral compass argument being complete bull sht but then weirdly try to moralise in the opposite direction with the ridiculous horse shit you've posted in the first paragraph.
I've not seen one person thus far who is against Qatar's ownership say or in any way imply that they'd be on board with the idea if it were the American state or English state behind the bid, so why you're bringing up the atrocities committed by those governments I have no idea. There's no need for any of us who don't wish for United to be bought by Qatar to give any consideration to those atrocities because neither the English nor the American state are also involved in a bid to purchase us. If they were, I can say that I'd strongly oppose those bids too. In fact, I'd oppose any bid to buy Manchester United driven by a nation state, since I fundamentally disagree with that ownership model in sport.
You've also been presented with plenty of concerns surrounding the possibly state ownership of Qatar specifically, surrounding their treatment of migrants, women, and the LGBT community, for example, and none of these have anything to do with race. You don't just get to brush all of these concerns to one side and cry "racism!!" because, again, the alternative here is not a different nation state that has also committed numerous atrocities. I'm not trying to argue that Sir Jim Ratcliffe is to be treated as a bastion of morality, or even that I like the guy, but I find the thought of his ownership considerably more palatable than the prospect of becoming a sportswashing vehicle for Qatar or in fact any other nation state.
If you have a preference for Qatar, that's absolutely your prerogative. But it's tedious to see the moral objections raised as "racism!!" based on nothing at all, just so you don't have to engage with them. Seriously, much as I disagree with this position, I have more respect for the ones who are open about the fact that they care more about how the owners run the club than the moral aspects concerning their ownership than those who just try to pretend that those moral aspects don't exist because it's inconvenient.
There's more to football than this.
United can thrive with competent people running the club. We have never needed this kind of billionaire running the club. It's why we protested Murdoch in 1998.
Spot on.
I can just see Spock saying that to Kirk when discussing why the Qatari bid is best. It’s totally what that saying means
I think your right, the Greedy bastards are as always putting money first, hopefully they hurry up and we can all get on with it no matter who owns it.
Sure we might be owner by a country that doesn’t think gay people should exist but have you lot considered “to infinity and beyond”?
Sure they’ve killed migrant workers who work in slave like conditions but we need to “boldly go” where no one has before.
Sure they’ve killed migrant workers who work in slave like conditions but we need to “boldly go” where no one has before.
Football ownership is a different world in the 90s, might as well compare it to 1890.
United is going to need vast investment on and off the field just to keep up with other clubs nevermind consistently surpass them
- Status