Whatever people think of Newcastle fans it is pretty obvious that they have been totally stitched up here. It has been revealed that contact was made between other PL clubs (and Bein Sports) and the PL before the PL threatened to "stop Newcastle playing football." It is very reminiscent of what happened to us with UEFA.
The PL is supposed to be independent and act for all its clubs not just a cosy cartel. I think it is very safe to assume that City were not one of those involved in this corruption (because that is what it is). It is also equally safe to assume that the owners of LFC and MUFC were definitely involved. So why isn't this story headline news in our media and SKY Sports?
You have said what I was trying to say to domalino. Excellent post.In the West we pick and choose whichever regime or deal suits us best and this is what the PL is doing. So manyoo can be a strategic partner of the Saudi gov but Newcastle cannot be owned by them. We criticise Qatar for promoting terrorism but play in their corrupt world cup.
Our football authorities are just hypocrites, there is no principle it is just what suits best. In this case virtue signalling and kowtowing to the red shirts suits best.
The press should be all over this but, of course, they are in the red shirted pockets too. So the deal should by rights go thru and Newcastle will effectively be owned by the Saudi government thru the sovereign wealth fund. Over to you Senor Teabag, our friendly (not racist at all) UEFA exec.
You have said what I was trying to say to domalino. Excellent post.
And that is precisely where the PL has got it horribly wrong. There is nothing in the PL rules which is about whether "a lot of people don't want Saudi Arabia in football." There is a fit and proper persons test and there are rules which prevent state ownership.You were mistaking me summarising the general feeling of journalists and fans with my own views.
And whether you agree with the reasons or not, a lot of people don't want Saudi Arabia in football
Could it be oil or the fact that they can pay cash for anything they want.Sorry what is'everyones objection to Saudi '. I have no objection what so ever.
You may quote the murdered journalist but I would retort with the recent U.S drone murder of innocent Afghan civilians. The US are probably the biggest murders of innocents going. If the Saudis ate so bad why is every government in the western world queueing up to do deals with them.
When did they bring in a rule against state of ownership ? Is that even legal ? And what would actually constitute state ownership ?And that is precisely where the PL has got it horribly wrong. There is nothing in the PL rules which is about whether "a lot of people don't want Saudi Arabia in football." There is a fit and proper persons test and there are rules which prevent state ownership.
In the Newcastle case, the PL was supposed to decide on the question of state ownership. The precise question was whether the presence of a particular director on the board of the club amounted to state ownership or undue state influence. Such a decision should be decided by the league alone and not dependent on other clubs approval. The consulting of Bein Sports (aka the government of Qatar) was particularly invidious. (Absolutely nothing of course to do with Bein's exceedingly generous sponsorship of Uefa's tournaments, oh no.)
These shenanigans amount to corruption and The PL should be ashamed.
I hope Newcastle win their case, even tho' I despise Saudi.
I think that is the PLs own interpretation of the directors and owners test. A challenge to that may well form part of the current case.When did they bring in a rule against state of ownership ? Is that even legal ? And what would actually constitute state ownership ?