Roan is racist to the core but the BBC lawyers keep his effluent in check. The redshirt anti-arab propaganda and their "financially doped/sportswashed/ dirty cheating oil club" narrative is imprinted on his ugly City-hating brain.I don't think so, and I'd be wary of being too loose with the term.
A lot of people mocked the club when they suggested Klopp might be racist, but I think his statement was. He suggested three clubs (and he was talking about those with Middle Eastern owners) could outspend Liverpool, which is obviously nonsense, particularly given how PSR has prevented Newcastle getting within a few hundred million of Liverpool's income.
In this case, it's a legitimate concern that Newcastle and City do have the ability to bring in vastly more money from related parties than any other PL clubs. While we're not technically state owned, the links between our owners and chair, and a huge number of state linked companies in the UAE is a matter of fact.
So, while it was racist to single out the clubs with Middle Eastern ownership with a bogus argument, I don't think it's racist to link them when the concerns are based on a legitimate one (even if it's one that many here don't agree matters).
I don't think so, and I'd be wary of being too loose with the term.
A lot of people mocked the club when they suggested Klopp might be racist, but I think his statement was. He suggested three clubs (and he was talking about those with Middle Eastern owners) could outspend Liverpool, which is obviously nonsense, particularly given how PSR has prevented Newcastle getting within a few hundred million of Liverpool's income.
In this case, it's a legitimate concern that Newcastle and City do have the ability to bring in vastly more money from related parties than any other PL clubs. While we're not technically state owned, the links between our owners and chair, and a huge number of state linked companies in the UAE is a matter of fact.
So, while it was racist to single out the clubs with Middle Eastern ownership with a bogus argument, I don't think it's racist to link them when the concerns are based on a legitimate one (even if it's one that many here don't agree matters).
Yes the club have said that everyone knows they cannot comment.Before I give that knob a click have the club made any official statement or comment on this whatsoever? Or is that headline typical misleading bollocks?
It is a well written piece. I can’t believe the BBC has reported actual facts rather than another snide opinion article. It’s what the BBC are meant to do. A rare thing indeed. No repetition or spelling mistakes either. A complete one-off I guess.I know. I actually didn't read it before I posted but wow, what's going on?
There’s been no statement from the club, other than a spokesman saying “As you know, we are not in a position to comment…”.Before I give that knob a click have the club made any official statement or comment on this whatsoever? Or is that headline typical misleading bollocks?
I'm guessing Slimey Stone didn't write it then.It is a well written piece. I can’t believe the BBC has reported actual facts rather than another snide opinion article. It’s what the BBC are meant to do. A rare thing indeed. No repetition or spelling mistakes either. A complete one-off I guess.
That or they both know the result but can't comment (yet / ever).It is a well written piece. I can’t believe the BBC has reported actual facts rather than another snide opinion article. It’s what the BBC are meant to do. A rare thing indeed. No repetition or spelling mistakes either. A complete one-off I guess.
The 120 years is wrong should be 32, since 1992 PL was formed
Like the Liverpool owner his first shirt sponsors was initially 16m then he got one from someone he new in a company for 25m so big business people who are worth a fortune always have a pull in the sponsor world!