Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
ayrshire_blue said:
Quick point.

As blues, a very small but relevant point we use when defending the club is asking where the criticism is of Arsenal (Emirates), Liverpool (Standard chartered) and the likes (just two examples of my overall point here..).

We're often met by the response that this is different because it's not actual ownership of the club but merely shirt and/or stadium sponsors.

So here's the rub..the fact these dubious organisations such as Emirates or Chartered can have their names plastered on shirts and stadium of major clubs, without ever being questioned regarding their principles or morals, is surely.....Sportswashing?

A clubs ownership who are slated every single day without fail, regularly brought to the forefront by the media and human rights abuses discussed and highlighted at every single opportunity isn't washing anything. Quietly sponsoring clubs without having to worry about any of the above, I would suggest, is.
Click to expand...

It's not a small point IMO.

We are now lumped in with Newcastle and PSG in the "state owned" stakes.
But as far as Amesty and HRW are concerned, shirt sponsorship is still "sportswashing" but rarely mentioned as such anymore in the UK mainstream media because the focus is on the 3 klopp clubs and more widely with Qatar due world cup.

Ironically Emirates/Dubai probably fund more into European football each year than Abu Dhabi/ Etihad and other Abu Dhabi sponsors

Emirates sponsor:
Real Madrid
Arsenal (plus Rwanda and an owner with very dubious dealings)
AC MIlan
Lyons
Benfica
Olympiakos

Other clubs who receive/have received Gulf sponsorship money:
United
Chelsea
Barcelona
Bayern Munich
Newcastle

Aside from Bayern Munich (fan protests) there is little push back against any.

As far as Amnesty and HRW are concerned the argument is that "state funding" is more pernicious due the scope for political influence etc. PSG are the best example with the guy on UEFA executive and the Bein deal. Corrupt as fuck.
 
ayrshire_blue said:
Quick point.

As blues, a very small but relevant point we use when defending the club is asking where the criticism is of Arsenal (Emirates), Liverpool (Standard chartered) and the likes (just two examples of my overall point here..).

We're often met by the response that this is different because it's not actual ownership of the club but merely shirt and/or stadium sponsors.

So here's the rub..the fact these dubious organisations such as Emirates or Chartered can have their names plastered on shirts and stadium of major clubs, without ever being questioned regarding their principles or morals, is surely.....Sportswashing?

A clubs ownership who are slated every single day without fail, regularly brought to the forefront by the media and human rights abuses discussed and highlighted at every single opportunity isn't washing anything. Quietly sponsoring clubs without having to worry about any of the above, I would suggest, is.
Click to expand...
Delooney’s stock response is that sponsorship isn’t ownership
A cowardly and disingenuous position imo. Money is money. Money doesn’t care who owned it 10 minutes ago
 
blueparsman said:
Ffs that clown MP Ian Byrne on talkshite spouting off about every teams supporters singing about Hillsborough. Saying it shud be in national corriculum at school. Can’t they just let it go.
Click to expand...
Maybe they could teach kids about the Heysel disaster too! But I’ve got a feeling they’d be “offended” by that
 
LongsightM13 said:
Delooney’s stock response is that sponsorship isn’t ownership
A cowardly and disingenuous position imo. Money is money. Money doesn’t care who owned it 10 minutes ago
Click to expand...

Sportswashing is oh so 2021 now. He's moved on :)

The twin forces driving the game now " On one side, Gulf states buying clubs and influence in the game for hard political purposes and soft power. The phrase sportswashing is now not fit for purpose because it is too soft a phrase. Then on the other side American capitalists looking for ROI"

That was on "Michael Calvins Football People" in September. Delaney also took issue with the academic Professor Simon Chadwick who writes widely on geo-politics in sport.
 
www.theguardian.com

Qatar calling its critics racist opens a debate that may be worth having | Barney Ronay

Increasingly prevalent line may sound dubious, but talking it through sensitively could have unexpected benefits
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

of course City get their usual airing, this time with regard Klopp’s comments and City’s alleged accusation that he’s xenophobic.
the sock puppet who penned this quotes Klopp saying the three state owned clubs have no financial restraint and can spend what they want, he then goes on to say Klopp is accurate. ignoring FFP and their spend etc, of course the buzzword that gets them around having to call out the cartel clubs who take ”blood money” in sponsorship is “owners”, therefore its fine and dandy to take money from any old mafia, just not to let them buy you.
American vulture capitalists good, rich Arab owners bad.
and of course this whole sportswashing straw man kind of falls flat on its face when our government dumps refugees in the centre of London in the middle of the night and our number one business is food banks.
 
Devil's Advocate said:
It's not a small point IMO.

We are now lumped in with Newcastle and PSG in the "state owned" stakes.
But as far as Amesty and HRW are concerned, shirt sponsorship is still "sportswashing" but rarely mentioned as such anymore in the UK mainstream media because the focus is on the 3 klopp clubs and more widely with Qatar due world cup.

Ironically Emirates/Dubai probably fund more into European football each year than Abu Dhabi/ Etihad and other Abu Dhabi sponsors

Emirates sponsor:
Real Madrid
Arsenal (plus Rwanda and an owner with very dubious dealings)
AC MIlan
Lyons
Benfica
Olympiakos
Newcastle

Other clubs who receive/have received Gulf sponsorship money:
United
Chelsea
Barcelona
Bayern Munich

Aside from Bayern Munich (fan protests) there is little push back against any.

As far as Amnesty and HRW are concerned the argument is that "state funding" is more pernicious due the scope for political influence etc. PSG are the best example with the guy on UEFA executive and the Bein deal. Corrupt as fuck.
Click to expand...
None of these hypocrites ever mention clubs like Leicester and Stoke whose sponsors are owned by the same people who own the club
As hypocritical as is their question about ‘how much was the second placed bidder?’
The only difference is that Leicester and Stoke aren’t a threat to the US owned redshirt cartel
 
Jam Tomorrow said:
www.theguardian.com

Qatar calling its critics racist opens a debate that may be worth having | Barney Ronay

Increasingly prevalent line may sound dubious, but talking it through sensitively could have unexpected benefits
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

of course City get their usual airing, this time with regard Klopp’s comments and City’s alleged accusation that he’s xenophobic.
the sock puppet who penned this quotes Klopp saying the three state owned clubs have no financial restraint and can spend what they want, he then goes on to say Klopp is accurate. ignoring FFP and their spend etc, of course the buzzword that gets them around having to call out the cartel clubs who take ”blood money” in sponsorship is “owners”, therefore its fine and dandy to take money from any old mafia, just not to let them buy you.
American vulture capitalists good, rich Arab owners bad.
and of course this whole sportswashing straw man kind of falls flat on its face when our government dumps refugees in the centre of London in the middle of the night and our number one business is food banks.
Click to expand...
Or perhaps you could write a book about how good the world cup in Russia was?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.