Can you please explain how the source of the money makes any practical difference? Also I never once said I was excited about them taking over so go put words in someone else's mouth.
Last edited by a moderator:
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Speak out until your heart's content. Always speak out if it's important to you, and that goes for everyone in this thread. Just don't tell others how to feel.
The excitement of a potential Qatar takeover is palpabol, we need that next lot of updates.
This is actually incorrect. It’s where you fart and shit yourself.
Have you been asleep for the last 30 years?
Nah, if I stayed asleep that long when I was 8 my mum would be ripping my curtains down and pouring cold water on me. Old school 80’s mammy.
Easter egg found
I haven’t. In fact the only reason I started posting in this thread today was because posters were mocking a couple of protestors who were speaking out. But while we’re at it, probably best not to call people (or at least agree with posters that do) hypocrites.
Indeed, some very childish responses to what was a very valid protest. A lot of people's maturity in here leaves a lot to be desired. Anyways, sorry if this has been answered already, but can anyone tell me what it actually says on the post-it note that got held up at the match yesterday?
Have there been any substantial updates the last few days or weeks? The thread has gone stale.
Well firstly the fact that it's been portrayed as a private bid when that's obviously not the case so the bid is dishonest from the start, as was Newcastle's, as a bullshit way to circumvent the rules. Secondly I just don't think states should own football clubs, regardless of which state it happens to be. Anyone who has more than £5 billion to spend is almost certain to be a bad person so there's no great option and I get that it's an arbitrary line I've set for what I think is acceptable but it's just mad to me that a state that wouldn't pay to give migrant workers safe conditions is buying a football team. Imagine if Sunak announced that he was going to have to cut funding in the NHS because he'd decided to buy Bayern Munich.
With regards to your 2nd point if you didn't then that's fair enough and I take that back, I did make an assumption and that wasn't right. It's just your posts have framed it like people are being mercilessly attacked for not being against this takeover when I've seen just as much, if not more, mocking of people who have any sort of concerns.
I get that this is a very contentious matter and although in my head if it happens then that would largely extinguish my interest in following United, I'm not sure if that will be the reality if it happens because United has been one of the constants in my life and the lives of most posters on here and it's hard to walk away from that. I definitely wouldn't intend to lecture you for not speaking out, my only issue has always been with those who are overly giddy about it or who think human rights groups have some ABU agenda.
And Majority of Man Utd fans (Red Cafe for instance) prefer Qataris ownership.
Unfortunately Man Utd is for the Glazers and they can choose what to do with it.
Whatever we say here has no gravity on their decision to sell the club.
Man Utd is a business entity.
I don't like it either but what can we do?
Is it palpable though? It's very much a back and forth on here.
On a similar note and not all directed at you I swear; whichever way you cut it, Qatar have questionable human rights records, alongside the other middle east owners at PSG and City.
If you're OK with it then fine, but don't pretend like we should all accept it because they're getting us away from the Glazers. We can't justify it by saying we're less reliant on their funds than those clubs starting from zero. They would still be our owners and for a lot of people, myself included, that has very negative connotations.
The notion that the severity of the response to human rights violations depends on whether the money comes from Herrod's is Manchester United is also rather immature.
Jesus I thought we’d managed to get the human rights stuff to the relevant thread there for a while. Why is it so hard to stay on topic and use the thread especially created for these human rights discussions?
Just sharts
I'm guilty along with others. Just a very difficult thing splitting up those discussions. Inevitably they go somewhat hand in hand with one of our potential new owners.
Personally trying to avoid it but sometimes get dragged in by the simplest of things.
Some posters apparently believe human rights violations are not to be taken seriously as long as the violators don't own United, so technically if the sale hasn't happened we're taking the human rights violations in stride.
I'm sure there is. But how do we measure this?
Nobody has mentioned human rights
The discussion is about the banner at OT on Sunday. Totally relevant to the take over
I get that mate, and occasional slips are inevitable. But there are certain posters that it’s their only topic of conversation.
I respect everyone’s views and opinions, even though they may vary slightly from my own. Is human rights in ME an issue? Absolutely. However, my personal views have me more concerned about my sister being terminal with cancer, issues on my own doorstep such as 10,000 homeless veterans as part of 200,000 homeless in the UK. I’m more concerned about an energy crisis which is leaving our elderly enable to heat their homes and falling into energy poverty.
Football is my escapism, I want to forget about my personal problem, issues in the UK, and global issues for a few hours a week. I come in here to see if there is any news on the takeover of the club. Again, 100% a valid discussion about human rights, just take it to the relevant place.
Just my opinion, not attacking anyone and not belittling anyone’s views. Just asking that people appreciate that others may have other things going on in their lives and may not want to reminded of the rest of the crap in the wrong thread.
Heads up to the mods because this is a decent and solidly worded post, in my opinion deserves a like and that's from somebody who was a Newbie last week.
Fair play.
Not sure this is the best thread for football escapism either in fairness.
I was alluding to the very obvious fact that football clubs are not tall buildings or a shop. Plant0x84 has already mentioned why (for those with blinkers on) so there's no need to reiterate them.
I was not alluding to what you have responded with...which you seem to be presenting as some sort of bizarre 'gotcha' in subsequent posts.
And we’re still left with the question of wtf does that matter in regards to human rights violations? Mention it until you’re blue in the face but that won’t make it less absurd. There is no moral hierarchy decided by the source of the money.
I've seen you post similar several times now mate and maybe you can expand upon it for me as I could be misinterpreting your point.
Are you saying the objections to Qatar owning Harrods should have been as strong as the objections we're now seeing to them possibly owning United?
Mike Keegan has been quiet for a while?
All this while using your iphone that was made in a Chinese sweat shop while wearing your sports gear made by 12 year old Indian kids. While filling your car up with petrol sourced from the middle east and shopping at debenhams - while drinking coffee from Starbucks, while shopping at Sainsburys.
I’m saying if the objections are due to human rights violations, those human rights violations exist independently of where the money is coming from. To say otherwise is just an evasion of the fact that oil states are tied to so many things in our daily lives. Whatever you decide to do and how you’ll feel if the sale goes through is 100% your prerogative of course and nobody can tell you you’re wrong. My responses are to posters claiming a moral high ground over posters that are excited about the takeover, or the ones that have accepted there’s nothing they can do about it and will continue their support of the club to the same degree that it was over previous owners.
Last edited by a moderator:
I have a bad feeling about this. That rumour about how Glazers will wait June is scary shit.
Ineos in June scenario. It can't finish worse than that.
Ineos in June scenario. It can't finish worse than that.
Are you saying a journalist reporting on the ME has been silenced?!
You know very well it absolutely can.
Worse than no sale?
Nothing in the footballing guidelines FA / PL / UEFA / FIFA codifies this. And I do believe this needs to be specifically called out. Football clubs are not your standard for-profit entities.
Not proposing any rule changes, just a simple acknowledgement that football clubs are community assets and have a responsibility to do right by the community is enough. The rule making can come afterwards.
That right there in bold letters lets the cat out of the bag. It's not about the human rights violations in and of themselves, it's about football. Well, it's also about football for the people supporting the sale, and even to the people that are indifferent about it. Moral high ground is now completely submerged.
I would rather stick with enemy which i know than sir Jim.
Sorry, it is just my feeling and nothing else (i am just a fan so i can judge some things based on my gut), but i think that Jim would be a complete disaster.
So if it is Glazers or Jim, i will rather keep Glazers and wait somebody else to buy us in a near future.
Glazers will not stick around too long. If they don't sell now, they will next year or a year after that.
The only update is the Old Trafford toilet floors are full of piss. With their asking price, the Glazers are taking the piss. Ratcliffe is pissing about. And the delay is causing fans to get pissed.
No need to apologise, it’s just your opinion which is all good.
Obviously I disagree with you, I think the Glazers propped up by Elliot or the like would be a dreadful outcome, and I don’t see them going if that happens but each to their own.
- Status