That’s a lot of whataboutism for one post. I don’t care if we were winning absolutely everything at a canter and the Saudi’s took over. I still wouldn’t support a team owned by the Saudi state. If you could and would, all the power to you.
Saudi sports minister gives update on buying club from Glazers
- Thread starter Zlatattack
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Are you implying that the moaning is misplaced? Do you think that people who are averse to the idea of the club we love being owned by sexist, racist, religiously-intolerant murderous dictators are simply "a bad smell"? Is this seriously what you're saying?
That'd be related to the conflict in Yemen.
IF this happens I wonder if we’d get match going United fans dressing as Saudis. Similar situation to city fans when they got their takeover
No what aboutism at all. Just asking if people giving up watching United do not use Amazon, Uber, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Nokia, Apple, Lenovo etc. Just to understand the consistency. For the life of me, I can't imagine being able to maintain that consistency
Obviously your well entitled to your viewpoint and as you say, all power to you for having it. I however think differently. It's not about supporting the Saudis for me, it's about supporting Manchester United. They might take us over, but United will be their long after they've finished with us.
I support the team, the club hasn't belonged to the fans for decades. Whoever the owners are, this will never change.
There are a fair share of dickheads in every fanbase, so probably yes.
If it happens we should reject big name signings and instead offer new contracts to Jones, Rojo, Grant, Lingard and build a team around them
loving something owed by someone else, it cant be loved because of someone else.
What about the genocide committed by the West, against the people of the middle east?
So much bombing and killing and it's still happening.
Please don't make out that Westerners are any better.
The West conducted an illegal war, bombing Iraq into oblivion. That's a 1000 times worse than what the Saudis are doing.
In before HQ.
The west are far more genocidal than the Arab states. You can have many reasons to not want a Saudi takeover but this one, whilst unpleasant, is just hypocrisy.
I don´t think that´s a good idea. With a world wide fanbase, It would hurt United´s image to be run by a dictator. It´s nice to win titles, but if it´s going to be at any price, we can just as well feed the players with drugs. To quote Trump: "We´ll be so tired of winning."
I would stop watching United if we end up being plaything of MBS. I know it won't make a lot of difference but this is where I will draw the line. Football is a game that I absolutely love but I have been against this kind of ownership since Roman at Chelsea and suddenly I can't stop just because it's United.
Delusional mate. It will never happen. We have a valuation of 4bn. We are out of reach of fan ownership by miles. Bad people is all we have left. Unless Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos fancies buying the club who else is there?
How is it so hard to understand that an independent businessman political views about a government and Middle east monarchs are not the same thing?
As far as I am aware no western government has shown any interest in buying man utd so your post is irrelevant.
Indeed. Show me the petition to prevent Blair, Bush and Rumsfeld from purchasing the club, and I'll sign it. For the record, I wouldn't be keen on King John or Henry VIII owning United, either.
That’s literally whataboutism
Phoney Tony who claimed to be a Newcastle fan when it was allegedly everyones second favourite team. I remember him harping on about it in one of his excruciating QandA sessions with some kids and I was dying for one of them to ask him to name the first eleven so I could watch him panicking with his earpiece
It’s just drawing comparisons though.
It’s all subjective and open to opinion.
I’ll say again, I will for this to happen every day, I cannot see a single downside.
The more links they have with western society the better, the more press focus on them the better.
Owning United doesn’t worsen the atrocities or cover up anything, if anything it shines a glowing light on it and puts them under the microscope because believe it or not football news is perversely more interesting to the average person than genocide is. Fact of life.
Like I say, I see no downside.
People need to stop pretending they have a choice or that the world will view them as though they’ve signed a petition to get this done and that they align themselves with Saudi crimes/traditions.
People happily turn a blind eye to issues that are certainly more relevant to them on a daily basis, things they actually have a choice in using/wearing/purchasing.
Where do you draw the line? Where it suits for most here I’m afraid.
Taking a step back from all the hate and rightly formed opinions. Why does nobody talk about Saudi trying to reform itself in a sense? Many laws have recently been changed withing the last 18 months to bring less oppression and more control over a persons own life. In no way am I validating this as them turning over a new leaf, but does anyone think a religiously established nation can change overnight?
I see alot of steps, outside of football, that Saudi Arabia are taking to welcome the world to their country more and reform changes that benefit their people in a sense. How long did it take Slavery and racism to be kicked out the west? How many Genocides have multiple western governments been involved in over oil/ territory ect?
Surely owning United would only bring more scrutiny down on them to provide change? Quatar has done amazing things to reinvent itself in recent decades, only positivity is coming out of that over recent years.
Future generations of royalty could buy into this even more. If there is a chance it can bring about positive changes, then why not? Don't think everything has to be so black and white.
I see alot of steps, outside of football, that Saudi Arabia are taking to welcome the world to their country more and reform changes that benefit their people in a sense. How long did it take Slavery and racism to be kicked out the west? How many Genocides have multiple western governments been involved in over oil/ territory ect?
Surely owning United would only bring more scrutiny down on them to provide change? Quatar has done amazing things to reinvent itself in recent decades, only positivity is coming out of that over recent years.
Future generations of royalty could buy into this even more. If there is a chance it can bring about positive changes, then why not? Don't think everything has to be so black and white.
Saudis need to hurry up. Glazers are fast destroying this club.
The difference is that the US government and other western governments do not own United. Private investors do.
Really? Its owned by a family up to their chins in Trumpness. Think again lad.
Which is why I don't expect the Saudi government or their Crown Prince to play a prominent role in the early stages of the takeover or running of the club if it ever materializes. If they ever do it they will do it by proxy, I think directly owning a football club will limit what they can do in football but then its United.
What?
Sorry, I don't recall Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg sending their goons to another country to murder, dismember and dissolve someone in acid so I'm struggling to see your point.
I haven't waded into this debate but I will say this:
It is one thing being owned and leveraged by a heartless concoction of businessman and shareholders; it's another to be owned by one of the worst authoritarian regimes in the entire world.
If you regard this point as merely splitting hairs, then it says more about you.
MUST, Sir Alex and the rest really dropped the ball. 13-15 years was more than enough to build up a block-shareholding for and by the fans. Let this be a lesson. We need more fan-owned majority clubs.
I do say probability wise, it's high that David Beckham's ultimate dream is to one day buy or majority own Manchester United.
It is one thing being owned and leveraged by a heartless concoction of businessman and shareholders; it's another to be owned by one of the worst authoritarian regimes in the entire world.
If you regard this point as merely splitting hairs, then it says more about you.
MUST, Sir Alex and the rest really dropped the ball. 13-15 years was more than enough to build up a block-shareholding for and by the fans. Let this be a lesson. We need more fan-owned majority clubs.
I do say probability wise, it's high that David Beckham's ultimate dream is to one day buy or majority own Manchester United.
Accurate points, but I would point out, the value of United is vastly out of reach from fan majority shareholders.
Which 15 years are you talking about? Because if its since they took over, the only shres you can buy are basically worth feck all when it comes to a vote on literally anything. 1 share is 1 vote. 1 share owned by the glazers is worth 10. And they have 120m of them.
Beckham is never going to own a billion let alone 4 or 5.
Literally the only people that will own Unnited in the next 50 years are Glazers, a state or some rabid fan that comes out of the woodwork with so much money that they don't care. And if such a person existed we'd have seen them by now.
Jim Ratcliffe is a huge United supporter and is Britain's richest man.
He also just bought another club.
https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...chester-united-jim-ratcliffe-glazers-17305733
Last edited:
Hasn't he just recently bought a team in france?
The same people who put the likes of Blair, Bush or Trump in office are the same private investors who own clubs like United and companies like Apple. Without these people's financial, moral and material support (biased media houses) people like Bush wouldn't get into office and when they do they commit war crimes with people like MBS for the benefit of businesses owned by the Glazers and other billionaires.
The only difference between MBS and Western warmongers is that the latter do it whilst hiding behind crooked politicians whilst the Saudis lack the sophistication and the motivation to hide their true colors because they don't have to subject themselves to elections and are untouchable.
He’s just bought Nice has he not?
He would be perfect as far as owners could potentially be. Can’t see it happening though.
Why do people keep suggesting that those against this are 'only taking a stand when it suits them'? As if saying that you'll have to stop watching the team you've supported your whole life is a choice they're delighted to make. Makes zero sense.
Ouch!
Bravo. Hit the nail on the head in my opinion.
Also regardless of anyones thoughts on this possible take over, we as a fan base should not be vile and insulting towards a person who shares a different opinion. Too much of this is taking over the CAF and quite frankly its getting sickening.
He also bought the Sky UCI cycle team, now renamed Team INEOS.
Just to put it into perspective, both purchases cost about £ 120 million - but absolute peanuts compared to what it would take to get the Glazers to sell.