We should officially represent to the UEFA to start the "moral high ground champions league."
Would you be okay with state or state-backed ownership?
- Thread starter sullydnl
- Start date
- Status
Hate to break it to you but PSG have never won a treble in a far easier league. Qatar coming in doesn’t guarantee anything.
Put it this way what is United meant to do? It’s clear the FA and UEFA are going to do nothing about the charges over City, otherwise they wouldn’t let them get to the point of winning the treble. The Saudis have just started with their fake shirt sponsorship. They will be doing the exact same thing over the next 5-10 years with Newcastle. If United doesn’t get sold to Qatar we are not winning major trophies for years, the best we will be able muster is the occasional FA cup and League Cup. If the Glazers don’t sell to Qatar it’s more than likely they will buy another club in England. United needs significant investment now.
If we knew the powers that be were going to punish clubs accordingly then I wouldn’t want to be owned by a state. But at this point we have no choice if we want to compete for trophies.
If we knew the powers that be were going to punish clubs accordingly then I wouldn’t want to be owned by a state. But at this point we have no choice if we want to compete for trophies.
Neither have Nice or Lausanne. PSG came a little bit closer than both.
Using a broad spectrum, City and Newcastle fans are basically the same as us in their morals, upbringing, life views etc yet the vast majority of them are perfectly happy with their ownership as they know it ultimately brings a better chance of success.
As fans it seems that is the most important factor to them.
I am genuinely asking the question that if we are social equals, why are a sizeable majority of our fans appalled at the thought of a Qatar takeover even if it will allow us to catch city and hopefully surpass them again.
I work with a couple of City fans and they love their owners for no reason that it has allowed them to be winners. As fans of the club, that's what gives them enjoyment . Nothing else.
I am seeing posters here who would rather we were rubbish but have a moral superiority over their rival clubs and I just don't get it. What would a Qatar takeover do that would be so awful. I don't think they would be banning minority groups from OT or using Utd for controversial propaganda.
I understand that the country has issues that we dont like but so do many many others and lets be honest, Ill bet most of us couldn't have picked Qatar out on a map before they got the World Cup but now we are all experts on Qatari life.
Personally if they are good owners and want to make Utd a force again, I am all for it.
As fans it seems that is the most important factor to them.
I am genuinely asking the question that if we are social equals, why are a sizeable majority of our fans appalled at the thought of a Qatar takeover even if it will allow us to catch city and hopefully surpass them again.
I work with a couple of City fans and they love their owners for no reason that it has allowed them to be winners. As fans of the club, that's what gives them enjoyment . Nothing else.
I am seeing posters here who would rather we were rubbish but have a moral superiority over their rival clubs and I just don't get it. What would a Qatar takeover do that would be so awful. I don't think they would be banning minority groups from OT or using Utd for controversial propaganda.
I understand that the country has issues that we dont like but so do many many others and lets be honest, Ill bet most of us couldn't have picked Qatar out on a map before they got the World Cup but now we are all experts on Qatari life.
Personally if they are good owners and want to make Utd a force again, I am all for it.
I know it’s not as simple as that.
City have momentum now and we need to try to do something. We have 4 chances every season to stop them. They will be on the hunt for a Quad and they will never stop.
I mean of course, cheating is cheating. I'm talking more of the morality and also infinite money mode.
Yesterday should be a reminder of why we should not want to be owned by Qatar aside from the sportswashing.
City‘s win was devoid of any real joy. Why would anyone wish this upon us?
They are still in serious trouble legally. If football wasn‘t so corrupt, they would have been harsly punished already.
Back to the human rights: Qatar can take a hike until they stop discriminating and exploiting people.
City‘s win was devoid of any real joy. Why would anyone wish this upon us?
They are still in serious trouble legally. If football wasn‘t so corrupt, they would have been harsly punished already.
Back to the human rights: Qatar can take a hike until they stop discriminating and exploiting people.
Yet, you are most likely perfectly ok typing this from your new iPhone built in communist China where workers get cents from a dollar and watching it from your telly that is also outsourced in the East, wearing Zara clothing that is sewn through child labour in Pakistan..
My sentiment exactly
such a washed up argument, as if there was only black and white, no shades of grey whatsoever
Thank you.
How so? It's only ok if it is for our personal gain?such a washed up argument, as if there was only black and white, no shades of grey whatsoever
Or you seriously believe that someone worth north of 6bln is clean and moral person? Name me one person or company that is worth in the billions that hasn't had issues with people's rights, abusing minorities, selling private information, ruining the environment, committing tax or other financial frauds or paying whoever it takes under the counter?
I like the utopian ideas but unfortunately it's not the world we live in.
I want to be know as a despised winning club again
Like he said, nothing is black and white, but one thing can be significantly worse than another. Jim Ratcliffe is probably not squeaky clean, and Ineos has no doubt had questionable business practices in the past, but he is for damn sure better than the alternative.
Qatar killed literally thousands of migrant workers through appalling conditions after having taking their passports so they couldn't leave. Qatar quite obviously bribed their way to get their little pet World Cup project. Qatar punishes homosexuality with prison for up to three years. Qatar punishes infidelity from women with prison sentences as well.
I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want the club associated with that country.
It's crazy how good Qatar's PR has been when the majority believes this
Disgusting
Absolutely nailed it with this post
Precisely.
I can't and they're all feckers. But for me there's no hypocrisy in finding one evil more damning than the other. All about the taste and personal morals, ultimately.
No one seems to care so why should we? United will be a juggernaut with cooked books and all the best toys.
Let's discuss the alternative. INEOS are known for polluting the air and water throughout their 20 years history. They have hundreds of cases settled or won against them in terms of human rights violations, railroad safety violations, pollution violations, plant explosions, unregulated fracking and those are just the ones we know as others have most likely not become public and were settled behind doors.
How many people have died from cancer due to the chemicals used during the process and how many billions of lives have been shortened due to the pollution they've caused? On top of that how many animals and plants have been killed to ensure their expansion plans that also no one seems to care about?
How do you measure evil, because I'm pretty sure INEOS affected more lives for the worse than the entire Middle East put together, but maybe because most of it is not visible to the naked eye is probably ok?
City have been bought by the Saudis 15 years ago. How they have affected human lives in England since they bought them? Yes, they have severe problems and human rights violations in their own country, but haven't they complied with the UK legislation in terms of human rights and how are people employed by them and taken care by them?
How has SJR affected human lives just with the Brexit campaign alone?
Obviously no one is calling the Qataris good people by any means, but in my books what INEOS have been doing since 20 years has affected humanity a lot more in a negative way and more souls than the Qataris.
On top of that they are not stopping and ready with their new shiny 3bln project that would turn Europe into a hydrogen bomb and most likely cause some natural disasters along the way.
And seems like people don't like cooking the books but are ok with SJR using his foundation to fund his 16m ski clubhouse?
Problem is, you either have chosen to put your rose tinted specs on or you seem to belittle the effect on the environment INEOS had over the years.
The irony is that out of the three - SJR, Qataris and Glazers, the Glazers are the ones with the "biggest" morals, or at least the least destructive to the lives of common people.
There's a lot going on here, including stuff that is just factually wrong. I can't be arsed going over every point. Although I have to say that I am a bit curious about Ineos' plans to turn Europe into a hydrogen bomb. Very interesting stuff.
What does annoy me quite a bit, is that you constantly write that anyone preferring Ineos ownership over Qatar doesn't care about whatever wrong-doings they have. If you prefer Ineos you don't care about the environment apparently. Ok.
My position is quite simply that Qatar is a backwards and corrupt country, and I'd prefer it if Manchester United is not associated with it. If the alternative is Ineos, so be it. Obviously everyone would much rather have something even better, that isn't on the cards.
Can't ever pick INEOS over Qatar after Ratcliffe offered a deal to keep leeches in place
This. Especially the stuff about INEOS harming the planet severely. Do we really want to owned by THAT?
I find it really weird how people will over look what Ratcliffe is doing. It’s because of his media influence I guess.
It’s the violations of FFP that’s the problem with City’s ownership, not the fact of who their owners are. The Qataris can own United and cheat the way City has and we would all deserve the criticism we’d get, or they can run the club within the rules of the governing authorities and deserve the trophies we may win.
What I don’t want to see is Manchester United become next Manchester City, which is not about who the owner is but what the owner does.
What I don’t want to see is Manchester United become next Manchester City, which is not about who the owner is but what the owner does.
There you go:
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...al-plant-antwerp-client-earth-court-challenge
For the effects of fracking there are numerous sources out there of what can go wrong and the effect on the environment.
INEOS already lost a case when they were trying to expand in Scotland.
https://www.reuters.com/article/scotland-ineos-idUSL1N1TL0AT
INEOS are also cooking books let's not pretend they are clean here, and whilst you choose to go with petrochemical company ahead of authoritarian state because of human rights is kinda amusing. I guess when you're doing the wrong-doings in a suit it paints a better image?
As for the bolded one - no, my point is that the wrong-doings INEOS have are affecting more people globally but looks better for the general public because it doesn't directly link them with the crime in question. The effect takes time to kick in and we already saw with the Corona virus when the world stopped for couple of months how the Earth began "cleaning" itself for a brief moment.
My position is also simple. If the one party has no morals running their business and generating its cash flow I don't care whether it is based in the Middle East or the UK. The moral card and advantage that it has over the other flies out of the window.
If the Qataris take over and abide all legislation (including not cooking the books as United have plenty of income on its own) and invest in the club, I'm ok with that. Money have no flavor and if you follow the path there is always some dirt and blood caught on the way. I have no interest to argue who is a better dictator Stalin or Mussolini.
This is how I feel too. I'd prefer if no club were state-owned, but that ship has already sailed. As more clubs get bought by states, we'll continue to slide further and further toward long-term mediocrity and irrelevance unless we join them.
Fair enough and I admit I know much more about human rights abuse in the Gulf than INEOS and their impact in Britain, should probably read more on this. Fecking hell, what a time to be alive.
I'd honestly prefer this to selling our soul. One title without having to bribe, fake attendance figures and fake sponsorship is worth ten of cities. Haven't people learned from Abramovich as well, what an absolute embarrassment that was for Chelsea fans having to defend a murderer and KGB agent running their club for the sake of winning a few trophies...
I'd refrain from such comments unless you can provide evidence to back up these claims.
Personally, I don't mind if the finances come from the state or the individual. The main point is there should be no interference in running the club or getting away from its ethos. The club is based in the UK and will be governed by UK laws in regard to LGBTQ or any other matters of concern for the fans.
100% this.
I want to see us being owned by Big tobacco. Just for a change.
Dumb argument, we are constrained by the world around us unless you choose to not participate in it. Most don‘t have that choice.
BTW my iphone is a 10 and I wear mostly thrift shop clothes.
TBH, the easiest on the eye are the tech giants. Not that they are clean by any means, but compared to others they don't come with the other baggage.
They have the funds and means to take control, but there seems to be no interest shown so far (if we don't consider Musk which was bullshit) and their expertise in running football club seems to be questionable at best too.
Which is my point. There isn't a single billionaire that is clean and able to buy United. Let's not pretend that it's only the East countries that abuse human rights.
It seems we just have different perspectives on this, which is fair enough. INEOS are clearly not perfect, and fracking in particular is pretty appalling. I probably wouldn't agree that they affect more people globally - let's not forget that Qatar is a country with an economy based almost entirely on fossil fuels. Both parties contribute massively to climate change.
I still think it would be a worse look for the club to be associated with a state with such medieval views, than it would be to be associated with a petrochemical company. And I think a lot of fans have concluded (probably correctly) that Qatar would be the better owners in terms of investments and results, and therefore they engage in whataboutism and false equivalencies to fit their agenda.
It's just sad that this is where we are with United and football in general. It won't change either.
Yeah I can see where you are coming from them, so indeed fair enough. To be honest with the way the world is moving and the western influence in the middle east maybe things might change in 10 years time, although of course some of the restrictions and beliefs are religion related which is always hard to overcome.
As you said the problem is global and not the state which each ownership is concerned and unlikely to change as the market is growing rather than shrinking and it will be even more money obsessed business which makes feelings and traditions obsolete and United just will have to get along if it wants to be successful as a club.
Personally I'd definitely prefer a tech giant as I said and the likes of Brin, Page, Ellison or Dell, but neither seem to have interest in owning a sports club, let alone in another country. Someone like Shiv Nadar is probably good option too, but again they have no interest shown.
There are handful of people that can own United and 99% from them are bad apples in terms of morale.
This is a hill I will absolutely die on if you want to go that way, all you need to do is look up the life and death of Boris Berezovsky if you feel like dirtying yourself with the vagaries of Russian Realpolitik. I do not think such people are fit and proper for running football clubs, and incidents such as these are commonplace with state figures and entities. Although I understand why you'd not wish to speak against them, after all we'd not want to be cut into pieces in a hotel, then sent down limb by limb to a waiting car like people associated with the owners of some football clubs have done.
If City are not severely punished for their financial breaches, then I am swaying to this takeover more and more. What is the point in obeying the rules if another club can get ahead without obeying them. It will mean rule breaking and morals are out of the window, what is the point in punishing ourselves with strong morals while other clubs are just going to keep breaking rules and continue to win.
Especially as it seems that 99% of football fans give 0 fecks about what City have done.
Especially as it seems that 99% of football fans give 0 fecks about what City have done.
No one is pretending that. For example, Adidas are a bunch of cnuts as well who play the "we love our LGBT friends" during pride month while taking Qatar money during the World Cup. There are no good guys in footballing conversation, only multiple levels of cnuts.
What I find disgusting is how quick people are to throw human rights under the bus, not because "everyone does it" but because they want to win a fecking trophy. Let that sink in, a fecking piece of tin is worth more to them than someone else getting the opportunity to live a life free from persecution. You want to be another city? Good for you, be another empty, soulless club where the wins mean nothing and the praise is bought and paid for on BT and talk sport. I'd rather we went down to be a mid table club than became another city. But thats just me. Im more than happy to take a fecking walk should we get taken over by the state. And stand outside, look at all the plastic fans who only care about winning at any cost and quietly shake my head. For years we have pointed at City and laughed, and now look how many are lining up to take the state owned cock just to be like them. fecking hypocrites.
- Status