Come here to laugh at Nu-Castle

[Airfixx]

Sports Direct staff 'not treated as humans', says MPs' report

Just a taste of what Ashley is prepared to do for profit. And that's in a country with strict laws and guidelines, he wasn't born in to a state where he has free will to oppress others.

I worked for Pizza Hut as a young'n and was treated like a complete dog too.... Again; there's still levels. It would be extremely patronizing for me to liken myself to being oppressed and abused to the kind of extent many are by such states/countries.

(The fact that a business the breadth of SD was able to get away with paying below minimum wage is as much an indictment of the government policing such issues as those getting away with it; so it's obnoxious as fuck for MPs to similarly indulge in such histrionics.)

Also, let's not pretend the whinging barcodes give a shit about anything other than Ashley spending more money.....

They care because it reflects on them. I'm not suggesting they're altruistic. Man City are a propaganda tool, if the club are doing well on the pitch and the local area is revitalised, they can cover up their own dealings at home. They're imbedded in to Western economies and society.

Ashley is a terrible owner. He turned the whole club in to a billboard for his company, beyond anything other teams do. He's mistreated managers and been forced to pay large fees as a result in the past. The way the club treated Gutierrez was beyond shameful, and you might speak of investment but the clubs facilities are terribly run down, and their spending is some of the lowest in the league. If he's incapable of providing any real investment, sell the club. He is a lying, greedy scumbag of a man and if he was owner of this club I would hope we'd have stormed the stadium by now.

Most football fans are hypocrites when it comes to this stuff, and only care when it directly impacts their club. When we sold Walker to City, how many of our fans were furious we legitimised them and accepted their blood money? How many wanted us to take it and spend it on players?

Would I prefer we didn't do business with City? Absolutely..... I'm pretty sure you would have noted the undercurrent in the Kane thread over the summer...... It's not like "Yay... Let's sell him to City" was a commonly preferred option.

Does player power however determine we have minimal options in such scenarios other than the alternative of repeatedly writing off valuable assets when they decide they have their head turned? Yep. Again see Kane; a scenario where literaly the only place he'd have been prepared to go was City.... Whatever the motivation; we didn't just pucker up and crumble; yet many people think we did the wrong thing and just saddled ourself with an uncommitted want-away former-hero whilst pissing away 100m+ into the bargain.

Bottom line is that although in opposition to national and state wealth, the power of protest as fans is often limited; it doesn't mean we should just passively shrug our shoulders and hold the door open to more City's/Chavs/PSGs flooding the game.

 

[Airfixx]

I wonder what This Fish thinks of these latest developments?

Back on the gay-pride mailing list and dusting off the Abba wigs as we speak.

 

[John Thomas]

But don’t mind our kits sponsored by the Nike Sweatshop Empire and an insurance company acceding to rule by genocideaires of Uyghurs.

The objection has only ever been and can only ever be that the trophies were purchased (which they were) not how.

They also don't seem to mind when we accept 50 million pounds sterling of this so called blood money for one of our best players like Kyle Walker

The false outrage shown by some people on here is so fucking outrageous it defies belief.

And then the very same people who claim they don't support the owners ahead of the football club, openly admit they'd stop supporting Spurs if we had owners who ....... they errr... disaprove of.

Staggering levels of hypocrisy

 

[Wellsey]

YI man, Have the barcodes got a women's team?

 

[Son Spurs]

Hate to see the Saudis coming in, they are the ultimate scum, but I echo the sentiments of others as to wondering why this is the final line?

Bottom line is that all prem clubs are owned by billionaires, if you are a billionaire I would say you have have caused death and suffering either directly or indirectly.

 

[Airfixx]

Hate to see the Saudis coming in, they are the ultimate scum, but I echo the sentiments of others as to wondering why this is the final line?

Bottom line is that all prem clubs are owned by billionaires, if you are a billionaire I would say you have have caused death and suffering either directly or indirectly.

Bit sensational that..... Just how indirectly must we go before that statement becomes plausible?


On the other end of the scale: ACTUAL murder, killing, abuse theft and repatriation of national wealth & assets etc. etc.

 

[Brian Fantana]

The way I see it, if the Barcodes get taken over by a billionaire with basically unlimited funds, it will just be another club with barely a trophy history to speak of (well, pre 1969 anyway) getting artificially bumped up the table and buying players who wouldn't have gone near the place before with all the bargepoles in the world.

Getting players to move to newcastle has always been a problem though. Convincing the best players in the world is easier if you live in london or at a push Manchester, but newcastle I’m not so sure. Especially if there’s another financially doped club in one of those cities or Paris wants that player.

 

[Don Corleone]

The way I see it, if the Barcodes get taken over by a billionaire with basically unlimited funds, it will just be another club with barely a trophy history to speak of (well, pre 1969 anyway) getting artificially bumped up the table and buying players who wouldn't have gone near the place before with all the bargepoles in the world.

Yep and we are left behind as per usual under our cunt of a chairman and owners. Newcastle will propel up the table like City, whilst our club constantly underachieves. The only way to get true success is too get taken over by extremely rich owners, that’s the truth of it.

 

[Tomo]

Hate to see the Saudis coming in, they are the ultimate scum, but I echo the sentiments of others as to wondering why this is the final line?

Bottom line is that all prem clubs are owned by billionaires, if you are a billionaire I would say you have have caused death and suffering either directly or indirectly.

True but there are levels. We wouldn’t accept American 19th century slave owners from Mississippi running a club but we are happy with 21st Century Middle Eastern slave owners using mostly ‘’workers’’ from the Indian sub continent.

Issue is it makes the league, FA and even this country look like the biggest bunch of hypocrites. I am not a Joe Lewis fan by any means but it’s not the same league not even the same sport with the owners we are talking about.

 

[Zomb]

Getting players to move to newcastle has always been a problem though. Convincing the best players in the world is easier if you live in london or at a push Manchester, but newcastle I’m not so sure. Especially if there’s another financially doped club in one of those cities or Paris wants that player.

They will just throw money at second tier stars like Son, Rice, and Rashford before competing at the very top table (For a few years anyway)

 

[MemphisWill]

FWIW 50+1 isn’t public ownership, it’s ownership by the club’s members, which sort of points to the solution to your line-drawing problem.

Wondering where we draw the line with ownership reforms while insisting upon a clear bright line regarding the morality of said owners is a bit inconsistent though, I must say.

You're forcing the club's owners to liquidate 50% + 1 share of their asset and sell it under duress to a body you invent by creating a club membership group. That's nationalization, my friend. Its the forcible seizing of property by the government and delivery of said property to the public.

I'm sorry, I know it all sounds rational and romantic in your mind. But its illegal.

 

[Son Spurs]

Bit sensational that..... Just how indirectly must we go before that statement becomes plausible?


On the other end of the scale: ACTUAL murder, killing, abuse theft and repatriation of national wealth & assets etc. etc.

Just being in possession of such a vast amount of wealth is indirectly harming others. Is it really necessary for one person to amass so much resources and wealth? There shouldn't be such a thing as billionaires. Look at all the homeless people in the world, all the people dying of hunger etc. If you are a billionaire then you are part of and contributing to the system causing that. Just because they aren't getting bad PR doesn't mean that they are indirectly killing people all so that they can have a lavish lifestyle.

The Saudis are incredibly evil, disgustingly, unashamedly so. We are all sad that they have come into football, but why aren't we sad about the unchecked capitalism that has destroyed so many lives around the world coming into football?

 

[FightingIllini]

You're forcing the club's owners to liquidate 50% + 1 share of their asset and sell it under duress to a body you invent by creating a club membership group. That's nationalization, my friend. Its the forcible seizing of property by the government and delivery of said property to the public.

I'm sorry, I know it all sounds rational and romantic in your mind. But its illegal.

If anyone is interested in history this is a remarkable display of the classical liberal ideology of the 1870’s Northern Republican who both steadfastly insisted on political enfranchisement for freed blacks but vehemently opposed the redistribution of the wealth in land that their forced labor had built as an abrogation of the sacred liberty of contracts and private property.

It doesn’t make a ton of sense to me in that context or this one.

(Sorry if that’s a super bizarre reference, I just happened to be doing some reading on that subject the other day and it struck me in reading these posts)

 

[MemphisWill]

Just being in possession of such a vast amount of wealth is indirectly harming others. Is it really necessary for one person to amass so much resources and wealth? There shouldn't be such a thing as billionaires. Look at all the homeless people in the world, all the people dying of hunger etc. If you are a billionaire then you are part of and contributing to the system causing that. Just because they aren't getting bad PR doesn't mean that they are indirectly killing people all so that they can have a lavish lifestyle.

The Saudis are incredibly evil, disgustingly, unashamedly so. We are all sad that they have come into football, but why aren't we sad about the unchecked capitalism that has destroyed so many lives around the world coming into football?

There are different levels. Its something you just refuse to acknowledge. Mincing up a journalist in a Turkish embassy and committing war crimes bombing women and children in a foreign nation is just different than underpaying your labour force and leveraging financial markets. If you can't see that, well, there's no helping you.

 

[Tomo]

You're forcing the club's owners to liquidate 50% + 1 share of their asset and sell it under duress to a body you invent by creating a club membership group. That's nationalization, my friend. Its the forcible seizing of property by the government and delivery of said property to the public.

I'm sorry, I know it all sounds rational and romantic in your mind. But its illegal.

Yes and no. In theory the government could pass a law and force it if they wanted to, Parliament is sovereign theoretical in all matters in the U.K. it is unlikely they would as they would cause strained relations with affected countries and would mostly like have to compensate to remedy the situation.

It is far more likely that if they ever did intervene it would be to put in some fan veto mechanism rather than part ownership. This however currently is unlikely as the government takes a very stand off approach to ownership in the U.K.

Parliamentary Sovereignty

www.parliament.uk

 

[mummy]

Simon Jordan reckons you could buy Derby County for about £50 or £15 million (couldn't hear him too well at the time). If I win the Euromillions on Friday, I'm going to buy Derby, then make an offer of £120 million for Kane, leaving me a few million for a nice Aston Martin.

Me and Kane can then go for the League 1 Trophy, after Derby get relegated next Spring. Then he'll be happy.

 

[Son Spurs]

True but there are levels. We wouldn’t accept American 19th century slave owners from Mississippi running a club but we are happy with 21st Century Middle Eastern slave owners using mostly ‘’workers’’ from the Indian sub continent.

Issue is it makes the league, FA and even this country look like the biggest bunch of hypocrites. I am not a Joe Lewis fan by any means but it’s not the same league not even the same sport with the owners we are talking about.

And who gets to decide those levels? So we're ok with someone hoarding billions, contributing to a system that causes homelessness, starvation, suicide etc but that's where we draw the line?

Not saying the Saudis aren't levels of evil above Joe Lewis, heck, they're leagues above him, but why is any evil ok?

 

[Airfixx]

Just being in possession of such a vast amount of wealth is indirectly harming others. Is it really necessary for one person to amass so much resources and wealth? There shouldn't be such a thing as billionaires. Look at all the homeless people in the world, all the people dying of hunger etc. If you are a billionaire then you are part of and contributing to the system causing that.

I don't need this explaining in terms of economics; but your take here is extremely fluffy and severely lacks perspective.

Just because they aren't getting bad PR doesn't mean that they are indirectly killing people all so that they can have a lavish lifestyle.

Again: ACTUAL MURDER.

The Saudis are incredibly evil, disgustingly, unashamedly so. We are all sad that they have come into football, but why aren't we sad about the unchecked capitalism that has destroyed so many lives around the world coming into football?

I think you're being increasingly silly.... Plenty of people mourn the affects of capitalism; both inside and outside of football.

None of this strengthens the suggestion that it's all much of a much-ness.

One of the richest men in the city typically owned the football clubs (once they stopped being genuine clubs)...... Jack Walker vs The Saudi shitbags or thieves like Abramovic????? ......All the same to you?

GTF.

 

[MemphisWill]

If anyone is interested in history this is a remarkable display of the classical liberal ideology of the 1870’s Northern Republican who both steadfastly insisted on political enfranchisement for freed blacks but vehemently opposed the redistribution of the wealth in land that their forced labor had built as an abrogation of the sacred liberty of contracts and private property.

It doesn’t make a ton of sense to me in that context or this one.

Jesus christ, do you like to hear yourself speak.

Your proposing the government forceably wrest control of commercial enterprises away from their rightful owners and bestow control of that enterprise on the public. Its nationalization of sport.

If you want to equally propose that this is a better way forward, in general, and that free market capitalism is a danger to society then that's fair enough. You're free to hold those views.

But FFS, stop pretending like what you're proposing isn't the illegal seizure of commercial property. You want to start a revolution, fine, go ahead. Football seems a pretty stupid reason to do it, though.

 

[CarrieFi]

I’m not enjoying seeing all the Newcastle fans gloating already. Acting like they’ve already bought won something!