[Football] Newcastle fans and YouTuber support Saudi, confront protesters

[keaton]

Again, the damage Ashley did to our club was over 14 years, not simply the last few seasons before the sale. It's easy to score internet points with though, I guess. "How can Ashley possibly be considered a bad owner when he bought that player for £40m?" How can he be a bad owner when he appointed Benitez?!"

We got promoted with a larger budget, because we sold more than we brought in. We did get promoted, but why were we relegated in the first place?

The minute you start actually looking into his tenure, beyond the surface layer, the more the reality of the situation becomes clear.

And before anyone repeates the same thing, I'm not looking for sympathy, other fanbases have had far, far worse. But everybody's battles are their own.

His long term damage involved leaving financially secure, owning your own stadium having spent almost his whole tenure in the PL. Something a majority of football clubs fans would describe as their golden age.

 

[Icy Gull]

I like @The Fish posts on this. Seems a sensible and eloquent guy/girl who is only partially in denial, but he is in denial

His club is owned by deeply undesirable people. Unlike him I would walk away, with a very heavy heart, if they owned us

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

In the end, it's the ownership model that is wrong. Nobody asked the Newcastle fans if they wanted Ashley or not, and nobody asked them if they wanted the Saudis. many did because they wanted Ashley out at any cost, but even if they had it would have made no difference whatever. And, as a matter of fact, nobody asked us whether we wanted Tony Bloom to take over from Dick Knight, although we're probably glad he did.

We can, I suppose, claim some moral high ground for the way we fought to get rid of Archer and Bellotti, and the Knight/Perry regime included us in the battle for Falmer. But although we now have a fan advisory board, we have very little say in what happens at the club.

Not that other models work too well. Socios in Spain get to elect the club president, and often vote for whoever makes the most outlandish promises about signings. German club members have majority voting rights and yet the Bundesliga is dominated by one club. There doesn't seem to be an easy answer out there.

The reason we have no say is that we have no financial stake in the club. I don’t see how fans can make those decisions without taking the financial risk if things go wrong, as Tony does at the Albion. Tinkering with the current system with fan advisory boards and the like really is all for show because ultimately they cannot have decision making ability without taking business risk.
There is though another way. Take commerce out of the game. Divide all tv revenues equally between clubs. Reward success with a trophy only and not more cash, as this contributes to the financial divide. All of this would create a football competition worthy of the name and would be almost universally rejected by fans I would think.

 

[The Fish]

You willingly give your money to a Saudi state owned business and want it to be successful. Before buying the club they assessed that you and most others would. I'd have more time for you if you simply owned that fact and stopped trying to somehow justify it through weak appeals to nuance. Sorry but it's just not that complicated, despite any internal conflict you and others may feel.

I hate to do this, but there are many examples of people giving money to Saudi state owned businesses.

Claiming that had I come on here and gave it the big one, "LoadsaMoney" and lording it up I'd have been more warmly welcomed, is just ridiculous.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

11/14 seasons in Europe before Ashley bought us, 7/14 seasons in the top 7, legitimate title challenges, FA Cup finals. Thousands on the season ticket waiting list.
1/14 seasons in Europe under Ashley, 1 season in the top 7, 2 relegations. No stadium, academy, training investment during his term, constructive dismissal, disability discrimination, 10k season ticket holders walk away. and so on and so on.

Better than some, worse than others. But terrible for us.

So you were entitled to continue with all of this success you describe then ?

 

[The Fish]

I like @The Fish posts on this. Seems a sensible and eloquent guy/girl who is only partially in denial, but he is in denial

Thanks.

His club is owned by deeply undesirable people. Unlike him I would walk away, with a very heavy heart, if they owned us

I respect that, and like I've said I know mates who have done just that. Nothing but respect for them too.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

In the end, it's the ownership model that is wrong. Nobody asked the Newcastle fans if they wanted Ashley or not, and nobody asked them if they wanted the Saudis. many did because they wanted Ashley out at any cost, but even if they had it would have made no difference whatever.

Nobody seriously argues with any of this. We know there is probably little that the Newcastle fans could have done to stop the takeover had they wanted to (spoiler - they didn't).

If they were not turning up at SJP, waving flags with Staveley's face on, and singing songs about how rich their owners are, then perhaps people MIGHT believe that they actually are at all 'conflicted' - because from the outside looking in, they appear to just be giddily excited about the COMPLETE situation.

 

[pb21]

I like @The Fish posts on this. Seems a sensible and eloquent guy/girl who is only partially in denial, but he is in denial

His club is owned by deeply undesirable people. Unlike him I would walk away, with a very heavy heart, if they owned us

I really wouldn't be surprised if they're a PIF financed PR goon.

 

[The Fish]

So you were entitled to continue with all of this success you describe then ?

No, I as a fan, am entitled to an owner who tries to make the club the best it can be. e.g. Blyth Spartans is my local non-league side, they can't win the FA Cup, they probably won't get into the football league in my life time, they're entitled to an owner who makes them the best version of themselves possible.

 

[aolstudios]

It's not entitlement beyond one thing all fans are entitled to. That the custodians of their club do all they can to make that club the best version of itself that it can be during their time in position. Ashley didn't do that. He hobbled my club, left it to rot.

& now you exist only to sportswash. Successfully right now.
You call that progress? You're sick.
& your needy appeals for 'nuance' increasingly hilarious. Own it or f*** off mate

 

[The Fish]

Nobody seriously argues with any of this. We know there is probably little that the Newcastle fans could have done to stop the takeover had they wanted to (spoiler - they didn't).

If they were not turning up at SJP, waving flags with Staveley's face on, and singing songs about how rich their owners are, then perhaps people MIGHT believe that they actually are at all 'conflicted' - because from the outside looking in, they appear to just be giddily excited about the COMPLETE situation.

Isn't that just terrace nonsense? Like when people sing that "we're by far the greatest team, the world has ever seen"?

I think the last bit is key. From the outside you see only the surface, check the Newcastle boards, ask them what they actually think.

 

[Tarpon]

I hate to do this, but there are many examples of people giving money to Saudi state owned businesses.

Claiming that had I come on here and gave it the big one, "LoadsaMoney" and lording it up I'd have been more warmly welcomed, is just ridiculous.

Ah, the old 'everyone else is doing it so why shouldn't I, defense', you are now one short step away from the classic: 'if I don't do it, someone else will.' Please keep going, even if it is wholly predictable.

And I didn't claim that did I? But you know that. Keep digging.

 

[aolstudios]

Nobody seriously argues with any of this. We know there is probably little that the Newcastle fans could have done to stop the takeover had they wanted to (spoiler - they didn't).

If they were not turning up at SJP, waving flags with Staveley's face on, and singing songs about how rich their owners are, then perhaps people MIGHT believe that they actually are at all 'conflicted' - because from the outside looking in, they appear to just be giddily excited about the COMPLETE situation.

This ^

 

[The Fish]

& now you exist only to sportswash. Successfully right now.
You call that progress? You're sick.
& your needy appeals for 'nuance' increasingly hilarious. Own it or f*** off mate

But we don't though, do we? Newcastle United exists for more than simply sportswashing the Saudi regime (unsuccessfully by the way), just as Brighton doesn't solely exist to promote AMEX, does it?

 

[The Fish]

Ah, the old 'everyone else is doing it so why shouldn't I, defense', you are now one short step away from the classic: 'if I don't do it, someone else will.' Please keep going, even if it is wholly predictable.

And I didn't claim that did I? But you know that. Keep digging.

I thought misrepresenting people's words was ok on here?

I mean, I didn't say "If everyone else is doing it why shouldn't I", but you suggest I did.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

No, I as a fan, am entitled to an owner who tries to make the club the best it can be. e.g. Blyth Spartans is my local non-league side, they can't win the FA Cup, they probably won't get into the football league in my life time, they're entitled to an owner who makes them the best version of themselves possible.

Really ? ‘Making a club the best it can be’ is pretty subjective. I can think of a few definitions ; sustainability, community involvement, entertainment, winning things. I am sure there are more. Different fans and owners will likely all want a different balance between these aims so you don’t really have any such right. It cannot be used to justify Saudi ownership of your football club. Actually, nothing can.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Isn't that just terrace nonsense? Like when people sing that "we're by far the greatest team, the world has ever seen"?

I think the last bit is key. From the outside you see only the surface, check the Newcastle boards, ask them what they actually think.

But the flags and songs - not tolerating, but CELEBRATING your ownership - ARE the outward face of your fanbase's attitude to it all. The public projection of your giddy acceptance of the new regime is EXACTLY what they've paid their petrodollars for.

That a few of you raise a metaphorical eyebrow behind the scenes or on message boards is utterly irrelevant.

 

[Hotchilidog]

Again, the damage Ashley did to our club was over 14 years, not simply the last few seasons before the sale. It's easy to score internet points with though, I guess. "How can Ashley possibly be considered a bad owner when he bought that player for £40m?" How can he be a bad owner when he appointed Benitez?!"

We got promoted with a larger budget, because we sold more than we brought in. We did get promoted, but why were we relegated in the first place?

The minute you start actually looking into his tenure, beyond the surface layer, the more the reality of the situation becomes clear.

And before anyone repeates the same thing, I'm not looking for sympathy, other fanbases have had far, far worse. But everybody's battles are their own.

The truth is Ashley didn't damage the club at all. Ashley may not have improved it much, but you bumbled along pretty well mostly in the top the division with the odd championship title when you dropped down.

You have no idea what a damaged club is. You are speaking to fans of a club who were 15 minutes from going out of business and had to fight for over decade to secure its future. You do this all the whilst Southend fans are hanging on by a thread, whilst Bury are rebuilding themselves figuratively from the ashes of a fire set ablaze by a genuinely damaging owner, and Scunthorpe fans who have seen their club plummet through the non-league divisions facing an uncertain future.

It's weird how you cannot hear yourself when you speak about the disastrous Ashley era, it simply wasn't. The Ashley era may have been a bit dull, humdrum maybe but in no way was the future of your club threatened. I find your attitude insulting to those fanbases who really have suffered at the hand of destructive owners.

 

[Horses Arse]

In the end, it's the ownership model that is wrong. Nobody asked the Newcastle fans if they wanted Ashley or not, and nobody asked them if they wanted the Saudis. many did because they wanted Ashley out at any cost, but even if they had it would have made no difference whatever. And, as a matter of fact, nobody asked us whether we wanted Tony Bloom to take over from Dick Knight, although we're probably glad he did.

We can, I suppose, claim some moral high ground for the way we fought to get rid of Archer and Bellotti, and the Knight/Perry regime included us in the battle for Falmer. But although we now have a fan advisory board, we have very little say in what happens at the club.

Not that other models work too well. Socios in Spain get to elect the club president, and often vote for whoever makes the most outlandish promises about signings. German club members have majority voting rights and yet the Bundesliga is dominated by one club. There doesn't seem to be an easy answer out there.

It's not what they could have done about it happening, it is about the celebration of what has happened. That's the issue.

Seemingly, even those conflicted are going to give a really good go of forgetting all abaout it and returning to be upset by it after winning some trophies.

The excuse for that? It's because of the pain caused by Mike Ashley, i.e. popping into the Chapionship for a brief visit.

What a bunch of ......

 

[aolstudios]

I really wouldn't be surprised if they're a PIF financed PR goon.

I honestly wouldn't rule it out.
The persistence is just weird