Just say you want United to have an unlimited pocket and buy the best players in the world to compete with City, no matter if it comes from El Chapo.
No need to mention the UN, UK,America, mine companies, Gaza, etc
I honestly have no problem with this, because it effectively doesn’t accomplish what people accuse them of trying to accomplish with it.
Now… if it gets to the point the players have to show up at a palace to kneel and kiss a ring … I wouldn’t want to play for that team.
But “sportswashing” doesn’t work. Qatar got the World Cup; it only made people notice their faults MORE, not less.
Bin Salman’s group bought Newcastle - a majority of his people still aren’t allowed inside the US and are subject to scrutiny to their human rights abuses.
And those issues are not solvable by withholding sport ownership. To get their attention you have to withhold fighter jets, threaten to change the terms of defense agreements, etc. This is something they do for status and fun. But it only gives them status in their own mInds.
When Bob Baffert brings an exceptional new horse to the Derby, I give little thought to the fact that a sheik somewhere wrote the check for him. I just really don’t care.
Now, where the line gets blurred too much is when you have entities that are literally part of a sovereign regime owning something. Being able to print money and play a part in controlling the actual value of money overall … that should preclude you.
This wouldn’t happen, but what if, for PR reasons, The United States wanted to buy a team? They could manipulate subsidy programs, bond markets, banking etc to the point that they could threaten all of La Liga if Real didn’t back off on a player. This is obviously hyperbole, but it’s hyperbole to prove a point: a state has powers at its disposal well beyond just make money that can allow them to manipulate entire leagues. PSG and City have already done it to an extent with national travel industry partners, fake corporate fronts…
BUT … if you aren’t going to stop state associated entities from owning teams, can you blame fans of their team from wanting to be one of them? If United has a structure like City’s five years from now, United can consistently pick any player in the world at any time, and the team isn’t just dominant… but FUN to watch… will you care? It’s not for United fans to stop foreign investment entities. That is the FA’s job, and the FA should take the burden of any backlash.
The average fan has enough issues of their own to deal with. They just want to show up on a special day, maybe with their kid, buy a jersey, watch a match, and enjoy something. Putting the burden of where the initial money came from on them is unfair.