Thaksin news

[djelanomcfc]

As usual some people write a load of negative comments about the man despite knowing nothing about him.
It's funny reading comments about his political past despite mostly everyone knowing fuck all. Don't pretend to be an expert on Thaksin and just be thankful he sold the club to a group in Abu Dhabi who want to make Manchester City one of the biggest/best football clubs in the world.
Thank you Thaksin and THANK YOU Sheik Mansour

 

[Dubai Blue]

Despite having lived under his supposedly despotic regime for more than 5 years when I was working in Bangkok, I was extremely supportive of Thaksin when he came onto the scene in Manchester (just ask Mammutly!!). I was certainly not a fan of the guy when I lived there but the future was so bleak for City at that point that I was willing to overlook his previous misdemeanors if it meant the start of a much-needed new era for City. Basically, my morals are that loose that I will back anyone if it is for the good of Manchester City Football Club.

Which is where the Thaksin story sadly goes sour. With hindsight, JMA's assessment of the situation is pretty much spot on in my opinion. The Abu Dhabi takeover was not part of a groundbreaking Thaksin Superplan; he took us right to the very brink and got extraordinarily lucky. Just as the shit hit the fan, one of the world's richest families was looking to purchase a Premier League football club.

To suggest that they were talked into it by their old chum from Thailand is spurious at best. There were only a handful of Premier League teams to choose from; they'd have got around to us eventually with or without Thaksin at the helm. And let's not forget, the club and Sheikh Mansour dropped him like a hot potato at the very first opportunity.

The only thing to be thankful for in relation to Thaksin's involvement in the takeover is that he had unfied the club's ownership under one man; but that one man could have been absolutely anyone and ADUG would still have done business.

You can debate the rights and wrongs of Thaksin the politician til the cows come home (blatant corruption and self interest versus populist social policies and overwhelming rural support), but the debate about Thaksin the football club owner should be a very short-lived one; he was an unmitigated disaster.

 

[Gary James]

You can debate the rights and wrongs of Thaksin the politician til the cows come home (blatant corruption and self interest versus populist social policies and overwhelming rural support), but the debate about Thaksin the football club owner should be a very short-lived one; he was an unmitigated disaster.

Not so certain about that. The Club may well have gone into administration with Thaksin in control, but that could possibly have occurred any way.

Regardless of the politics, Manchester City survived because of Thaksin and now prospers because he sold the Club on.

 

[Dubai Blue]

You can debate the rights and wrongs of Thaksin the politician til the cows come home (blatant corruption and self interest versus populist social policies and overwhelming rural support), but the debate about Thaksin the football club owner should be a very short-lived one; he was an unmitigated disaster.

Not so certain about that. The Club may well have gone into administration with Thaksin in control, but that could possibly have occurred any way.

Regardless of the politics, Manchester City survived because of Thaksin and now prospers because he sold the Club on.

I agree that his entry and exit garner a modicum of merit, but when you look at his reign in isolation it was nothing but shambolic. Constantly undermining the manager, sacking Sven, not paying wages, buying Jo (!!!), using the club as a political pawn etc etc; it was a farce.

 

[Gary James]

You can debate the rights and wrongs of Thaksin the politician til the cows come home (blatant corruption and self interest versus populist social policies and overwhelming rural support), but the debate about Thaksin the football club owner should be a very short-lived one; he was an unmitigated disaster.

Not so certain about that. The Club may well have gone into administration with Thaksin in control, but that could possibly have occurred any way.

Regardless of the politics, Manchester City survived because of Thaksin and now prospers because he sold the Club on.

I agree that his entry and exit garner a modicum of merit, but when you look at his reign in isolation it was nothing but shambolic. Constantly undermining the manager, sacking Sven, not paying wages, buying Jo (!!!), using the club as a political pawn etc etc; it was a farce.

I was at the Club at the time and... let's just say for the moment that there were some significant improvements within the Club as well. More will be said in "The Journey" when it comes out.

 

[Dubai Blue]

Not so certain about that. The Club may well have gone into administration with Thaksin in control, but that could possibly have occurred any way.

Regardless of the politics, Manchester City survived because of Thaksin and now prospers because he sold the Club on.

I agree that his entry and exit garner a modicum of merit, but when you look at his reign in isolation it was nothing but shambolic. Constantly undermining the manager, sacking Sven, not paying wages, buying Jo (!!!), using the club as a political pawn etc etc; it was a farce.

I was at the Club at the time and... let's just say for the moment that there were some significant improvements within the Club as well. More will be said in "The Journey" when it comes out.

Ooooh, you tease!!

 

[Anonymous]

Gary, would it be fair to say that we were already on the brink of disaster when Thaksin came in?

I realize some of what he did was, let's say marginal, while he was our owner....but just as Hughes was necessary to get to the point where we could get Mancini...we needed Thaksin to get Sheikh Mansour.

Either way I never understood the open hostility towards Dr T, even after he sold the club. He'll always be one of the good guys in my eyes...good luck to him.

 

[VOOMER]

This! Perfect summary and 100% accurate

FFS, get out of his arsehole.

The man didn't give a fuck about this club.

He dragged its name through the mud.

He associated it with issues that no self respecting football club should ever be associated with.

He used it as a political puppet.

He saw it as his own political toy, meddling with every aspect of it, solely concerned with
how it would look/play out in Thailand.

He was a megalomaniac.

But worst of all, he couldn't care less what happened to it.

He took horrendous gambles with the future of the club, taking it closer to oblivion than anyone before or since, solely on the off chance that it might result in the little shit getting political power back in Thailand.

So what if he was lucky enough to have a few contacts with our current owners. It wasn't part of his grand plan. He took us right up shit creek and then managed to be the recipient of the biggest stroke of luck anyone has ever had when trying to offload a club they had completely fucked over.

Mussolini got the trains running on time but he was a cnut and that it was an unintentional side effect of his shite plan. Just like getting lucky when selling the club was an unintentional side effect of Thaksin's grubby little plan to brand this club as, first and foremost, an integral part of Thai politics and his own grubby plays for power.

And are we to believe that our current owners are the equivalent of a two bit lottery winner whose decisions on whether or not to make investments are made on the basis of overtures from a grubby, discredited politician? Did they suddenly get a phone call from him one morning whereby he proceeded to recommend that they buy City, upon which urgings they
decided "Oh, well, if Thaksin says its a good investment....."

In terms of this club's history, he is the biggest **** ever to be associated with the club and showed complete disregard for its future and health. No-one else has ever been so unconcerned about the club and therefore taken it so close to oblivion on the off chance that it would aide their totally unrelated (to MCFC) personal ambitions.

He can fuck off.

You're wrong, the biggest **** ever to be associated with the club was Peter Swales, he did far more damage to the club than Thaksin ever did, all he was ever interested in was lining his own pocket, and his beloved radio rentals, the amount of millions wasted by that twat is astronomical, it's frightening just how close City came to oblivion with that oxygen thief at the helm, ask Franny Lee how bad Swales was, Swales was the bentest bastard ever involved with Manchester City Football Club.

to *ucking true, 2 million a year went out of the coffers each year to him and his mates.<br /><br />-- Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:40 am --<br /><br />

This! Perfect summary and 100% accurate

FFS, get out of his arsehole.

The man didn't give a fuck about this club.

He dragged its name through the mud.

He associated it with issues that no self respecting football club should ever be associated with.

He used it as a political puppet.

He saw it as his own political toy, meddling with every aspect of it, solely concerned with
how it would look/play out in Thailand.

He was a megalomaniac.

But worst of all, he couldn't care less what happened to it.

He took horrendous gambles with the future of the club, taking it closer to oblivion than anyone before or since, solely on the off chance that it might result in the little shit getting political power back in Thailand.

So what if he was lucky enough to have a few contacts with our current owners. It wasn't part of his grand plan. He took us right up shit creek and then managed to be the recipient of the biggest stroke of luck anyone has ever had when trying to offload a club they had completely fucked over.

Mussolini got the trains running on time but he was a cnut and that it was an unintentional side effect of his shite plan. Just like getting lucky when selling the club was an unintentional side effect of Thaksin's grubby little plan to brand this club as, first and foremost, an integral part of Thai politics and his own grubby plays for power.

And are we to believe that our current owners are the equivalent of a two bit lottery winner whose decisions on whether or not to make investments are made on the basis of overtures from a grubby, discredited politician? Did they suddenly get a phone call from him one morning whereby he proceeded to recommend that they buy City, upon which urgings they
decided "Oh, well, if Thaksin says its a good investment....."

In terms of this club's history, he is the biggest **** ever to be associated with the club and showed complete disregard for its future and health. No-one else has ever been so unconcerned about the club and therefore taken it so close to oblivion on the off chance that it would aide their totally unrelated (to MCFC) personal ambitions.

He can fuck off.

You're wrong, the biggest **** ever to be associated with the club was Peter Swales, he did far more damage to the club than Thaksin ever did, all he was ever interested in was lining his own pocket, and his beloved radio rentals, the amount of millions wasted by that twat is astronomical, it's frightening just how close City came to oblivion with that oxygen thief at the helm, ask Franny Lee how bad Swales was, Swales was the bentest bastard ever involved with Manchester City Football Club.

to *ucking true, 2 million a year went out of the coffers each year to him and his mates.

 

[Matty]

If ever there was a statement that demonstrates how ignorant some people on these forums are then it's this.

Sometimes people try and be politically correct and bend over backwards so much to not seem racist that they end up looking like a dickhead. Congratulations, you've just acheived this. But, I suppose, as you live in an amongst this political/millitary ridiculousness you're immune to it's idiocy now.

Well done, mate. With that last bit you lost all the sympathy you might have generated and made yourself look just as much of a jerk as you were painting halfcenturyup.

I neither asked for, nor wanted the sympathy of anyone. I say it as I see it, the army overthrowing the elected government is never an acceptable situation. Plus halfcenturyup was the one with the personal attack, I'm completely content with my response, if you're not then, well, I actually don't care.

 

[Gary James]

Gary, would it be fair to say that we were already on the brink of disaster when Thaksin came in?

I realize some of what he did was, let's say marginal, while he was our owner....but just as Hughes was necessary to get to the point where we could get Mancini...we needed Thaksin to get Sheikh Mansour.

Either way I never understood the open hostility towards Dr T, even after he sold the club. He'll always be one of the good guys in my eyes...good luck to him.

Ignoring the political side of his life (which is easy to say but not easy to do), I tend to judge City's owners/directors/managers and so on in comparison with others who have held similar positions.

I also have to consider how City's owners think about the Club's history.

I also like to judge whether a Club is better or worse when someone leaves than when they arrived.

All I'll say is that in the meetings I attended, interviews I have performed, and documents I have seen, Thaksin's time at City was a crucial step between what we had and what we now have. He did do a lot of good and he showed significant interest in City's history (not as much as today's leaders, but much more than many of his predecessors).

There was a lot of areas that brought concern of course, but many people I respect and admire have talked of the positive influence they felt when he arrived.

His motives may have been questionable, I couldn't say, but don't forget he had tried to buy Liverpool before he bought City (and he pulled out of that purchase despite what may be widely perceived today) while he was still Thailand's PM, so were his motives tied in with his political ambitions or not?

If there's evidence to say he took a couple of million out of the Club each year I'd like to see it, but I'd also question how this compares to others at City and elsewhere over the years. We may not like the concept, but if you own a club outright then it's your club, not the fans (I obviously believe the fans are crucial and the most significant aspect of any club, but factually the owner can do anything they like so long as it's legal, look at the Glazers).

Thaksin's time at City is not as clear as saying he was bad or good, but overall I'm convinced City achieved more - and survived - because of his brief spell in charge than they would have without him.

I have a lot of time for John Wardle and know he wanted the best for City, and I'm certain that in 2007 selling to Thaksin was the best option available to him. Personally I'd have preferred a fan buy-out at the time, but today we probably would not have been able to challenge.