Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
The "holier than thou" attitude of some on here is funny and sad at the same time. It seems for them world history consists of only the last 20 years or so.
 
Zed 101 said:
Sportswashing, greenwashing blah, blah, blah if you want to watch top tier football we are long past the point of no return... if you want a vegan, PETA, Greeenpeace, Amnesty international, friendly club good luck finding one above pub level, my soul has long since been sold many times over.
Click to expand...

:lol: nice to hear such honesty
 
We are getting owners that will put the club's interests at the top of their agenda.

The corrupt cheats are getting relegated.

The dippers are busted flush.

Arsenal are decent again but long term won't be able to compete with us financially.

Atletico Arabia might become a blue cheat lite but we'll be perfectly equipped to deal with them now unlike the last time.

Chelsea's strategy is either genius or batshit suicidal, hopefully latter.

Spurs are... Spurs.

Buckle up folks, the good times are returning to Old Trafford. United is becoming great again.
 
Looks like it will be the Qatari’s as I doubt anyone else has the same obscene amount of money as they do that’s interested in purchasing a football club.

The only question that seems to be remain unanswered that is being brandished out there across the media is that UEFA/PL could block it due to PSG being owned by a bunch of Qatari’s and these private investors need to prove that they have no stake in PSG? Begs the question how on earth can Red Bull own two clubs in Europe then - Leipzig & Salzburg?
 
No new owners would want to carry ANY of the anti-Glazer sentiment into their new reign by allowing a minority stake to be retained. It’ would be nonsensical and would surely feature highly on any risk register likely buyers have compiled.
 
Samid said:
We are getting owners that will put the club's interests at the top of their agenda.

The corrupt cheats are getting relegated.

The dippers are busted flush.

Arsenal are decent again but long term won't be able to compete with us financially.

Atletico Arabia might become a blue cheat lite but we'll be perfectly equipped to deal with them now unlike the last time.

Chelsea's strategy is either genius or batshit suicidal, hopefully latter.

Spurs are... Spurs.

Buckle up folks, the good times are returning to Old Trafford. United is becoming great again.
Click to expand...

We certainly don't need a murderous homophobic state to buy us to be great again.
 
The one thing we have done right is the Youth System is still generating very good players.
I would not want us just buying big names.
Our two best players ever. Edwards and Best came through that.

We have the best manager in world football.
Back him reasonably and we will win the lot.
 
TheReligion said:
What’s interesting about it to you?
Click to expand...

I suspect he is looking down on those who aren't expressing our moral outrage like him, albeit it silently or at best mumbling it under his breath. Therefore we are cnuts who endorse modern day slavery, homophobic and misogynytic.
 
Zed 101 said:
Sportswashing, greenwashing blah, blah, blah if you want to watch top tier football we are long past the point of no return... if you want a vegan, PETA, Greeenpeace, Amnesty international, friendly club good luck finding one above pub level, my soul has long since been sold many times over.
Click to expand...
I find this logic equally funny and dangerous. Incredible you’d have people believe the world is black or white and you either have vegan PETA pub level teams or all equally corrupt and morally questionable top teams. Nothing in between right? Would it then matter if we were to be bought by North Korea or some mass murder that happens to be a billionaire or we’d hear all the same “oh but our souls have long been sold already and if I can’t be 100% impeccable innocent and moral I don’t care and give me a break”, I wonder
 
Infra-red said:
hhhmmm. Anonymous, mega-rich 'Qatari investors' mentioned by Mail Online, Jamie Jackson and Talksport wouldn't be made up by the Glazers in an attempt to force other interested parties to abide by their silly timetable, would they?
Click to expand...

Yeah.

I am open to believing it. I just find it a bit odd that gulf sources are so quiet about it.

The reporting in the English sports press today has been all over the place. Some people are saying it's the Emir directly, some saying nothing to do with him or the state, some saying that any bid could only move forward if UEFA changed its rules on ownership due to Qatar's commitment to PSG.

All feels a bit lacking in substance.
 
Samid said:
We are getting owners that will put the club's interests at the top of their agenda.
Click to expand...

No, you're getting owners that will put their own interest on top of their agenda, just as before. Difference is, Glazers were about money, while Qatar is about sportswashing.
Can't wait for all 'ya guys to sing praises of the fabulous Qatari Royal family. On the upside, we'll have a proper El Plastico Derby in Manchester from now on
 
Rozay said:
But these are not simply 'tyrants' we are talking about. We are talking about a sovereign state. A recognised one, even if some would try their hardest to not acknowledge their validity.

I am not excusing the atrocities you speak of. I am refuting the insinuation that any subsequent act that is NOT an atrocity is merely an attempt to 'cover up' the atrocities in the first place. Again, this is a sovereign nation state. Not some celebrity or corporation. The complexity and amount of facets to their existence is being severely belittled in favour of a narrow and myopic definition of 'evil doers'. When you start to look at them as an actual nation, the way we look at nations in the West, their deeds do not necessarily have to define them in the same way. This is a country, a 'PR exercise' is massively simplistic, this isn't Mason Greenwood.

The issue I have is the throwing around of the term 'sportswashing' any time an ME state tries to do anything OTHER than behead someone or ban homosexuality is to not acknowledge their credibility as a nation. My argument is that many in the west are too lazy to see them as anything other than 'those barbarians who do x and y', and it would likely be more convenient when the mental imagery of such places were as depicted in movies like Delta Force, with little other than desert land and men in traditional attire in Land Cruisers wielding AK-47s. The fact that the imagery has changed to what would be considered more 'normal' things - leisure, tourism, world-class medicine, architecture and of course - sport is not simply because someone wants to trick everyone into not labelling them as homphobic. It is because all countries would like world class facilities, tourism revenue etc. Not just western ones. Only in Qatar they don't allow you to be gay or drunk while doing it. Which is a valid point to disagree with, my issue is that everything else doesn't start from that position. They are simply developing their countries in the same way Israel has done so post WW2, South Africa has been doing post-apartheid and many others. They are doing it for the betterment of their people. Not for western approval.

The US, for example, is probably the only western state that allows people to simply purchase guns and use them. Unlike the UK and most (all) other western states, their state also kills people. They have a death penalty which others don't. I could list so many more things that the rest of us don't approve of but their actions will never be perceived from the starting position of those things. Perhaps because we have agreed to recognise them as real people and a real country. So as much as I abhor their gun laws, I still go there at least once a year, and I don't view every new attraction in Las Vegas as no more than an attempt to distract from the fact that they have a death penalty. It's just one of their things I disagree with, and there are things that I like. All I am saying is that as a nation, Qatar has the right to be viewed the same. 'Sportswashing', in that respect, I find highly condescending because it would be never be used of a Western State in this day and age regardless of probably anything else they chose to do. So this is not me validating any Qatari practise, it is me taking an objection to the inference that any subsequent act is nothing more than PR. A nation can do both good and bad things. Most of them do.
Click to expand...

Fully agree, sports washing is blindly west-biased term,

Homosexual rights in the UK only really evolved to anything like reasonable in the 1980s onwards, Alan Turing one of the nations greatest men at the time was given the choice of jail or chemical castration, and up to 100,000 people were faced with the same punishment between 1950 and 1980, technically it was still illegal to practice gay sex in the uk up to 2003, you do not have to dig deep to find evidence of ongoing inequality on the UK, maybe people are not being stoned to death for who and what they are but there are still things that make me sick.

Right now in America you do not have to look far to see human rights infractions (although nicely rebadged as civil rights), and legal restrictions being placed on homosexuals and women, anyone heard of Guantanamo bay? ICE?

People need to look at everywhere right now and recent history instead of focusing on the narrative the media wishes to portray, not saying that there are not things which go in Qatar that I find abhorrent, but change if it is to happen needs to come from the will of their people not the condemnation of others.
 
2ndTouch said:
No, you're getting owners that will put their own interest on top of their agenda, just as before. Difference is, Glazers were about money, while Qatar is about sportswashing.
Can't wait for all 'ya guys to sing praises of the fabulous Qatari Royal family. On the upside, we'll have a proper El Plastico Derby in Manchester from now on
Click to expand...
Someone sounds nervous.
 
AltiUn said:
I’m a bit thick, what’s he implying?
Click to expand...

I believe he's implying that Qatar are being quick to indicate the separation of the two as they know it will be an area of focus should United be bought due to the links to PSG ownership
 
sglowrider said:
Football really started being a busines since the Argentina world cup. That was the beginning of the end in terms of a
Pure sporting competition.
With the founding of the PL it went into steroids. The super League would have been or maybe the next iteration.
Click to expand...

that's been the issue the entire time with the Green and Gold army with the Glazers Out Brigade in that they want the club sold b/c they feel like the club has been fleeced of money by the Glazers.

If the state of Qatar owns the club, how's that really that much different? The fans don't have the club, the state of Qatar has the club. Fans will have no say in the matter of what happens with the club nor will they have a forum to address the owners.

The real issue for most is that they want the club back at the top, simple as that. They want a group that will invest in the club and not take money out of the club. Who's to say a consortium won't conduct themselves the say way as the Glazers? or worse....Get the club all jammed up like City is now?
 
The mystery bidder is reported in today’s Guardian as being the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani.
 
Red Dreams said:
The one thing we have done right is the Youth System is still generating very good players.
I would not want us just buying big names.
Our two best players ever. Edwards and Best came through that.

We have the best manager in world football.
Back him reasonably and we will win the lot.
Click to expand...
ha, what ?
 
AltiUn said:
I’m a bit thick, what’s he implying?
Click to expand...
Re: "it is understood those driving the Qatar interest are conscious of the Uefa rules (of dual club ownership) and a solution is being sought"
 
Infra-red said:
hhhmmm. Anonymous, mega-rich 'Qatari investors' mentioned by Mail Online, Jamie Jackson and Talksport wouldn't be made up by the Glazers in an attempt to force other interested parties to abide by their silly timetable, would they?
Click to expand...
Or the Saudis can't directly bid because of Newcastle and come in with their anonymous holdco that has a Western friendly name like the United Football Group
 
RORY65 said:
They also sound correct in fairness.
Click to expand...
Sounds like sour grapes to me. No oppos ever gave a shit about our ownership, often defended it, until we threatened to be owned by someone who could let us live up to our full potential.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.