Rayvin
-
Content Count
17,932 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Posts posted by Rayvin
-
-
I suspect this will pass once the press get their fill of it, which might only actually be a few days. Guardian aside, I've actually seen hardly any fans even of other clubs kicking off about this. No one seems bothered. And maybe that is an indictment of our society but then it's not the fans fault we ended up here as everyone keeps saying.
-
1
-
-
Yep, that's hard to look at.
Then again, the Times is owned by Murdoch who, as i recall supported the Iraq war. 460,000 deaths followed that.
It's very sad that our society permits this, but on the other hand, this is the society we choose to have. If there's blood on our hands, there's blood on everyone's. I vote against this shit every time I get the chance. Does Murdoch? Does he fuck.
-
3
-
1
-
-
Oh I think that might have been something along the lines of widespread relief and elation, Alex
Whoppers.
-
1
-
-
Might pick up this year's edition of football manager and have a go at the January spending plan myself
-
2
-
-
That is completely true. And they'll hate every word of it.
-
Have a similar memory of a city fan coming in here and complaining that we beat them in the cup one year. See, most clubs have these raging knackers who I assume go from forum to forum making total arses of themselves by calling out other fans. We have The Fish who goes from forum to forum talking us down, managing expectations and telling them not to overestimate us.
It's the uniqueness of the community that makes it special
-
3
-
-
I recall a TdanSmith who was around for a while but I thought he was an NUFC fan tbh. Maybe though. EDIT - suspect this is a reference that might pre-date my time on here now
Been here for nearly 10 fucking years and still not up to speed with all the references.
Gonna add for the memory of that Spurs fan as well... this may be full on wet dream stuff now, but I also vaguely recall that the loss to us cost them their CL spot that year which they lost to Arsenal...? It's like it was an omen for what's about to come, where we cost them CL spots in future. Except they'll lose them to us directly. And it'll be funnier.
-
1
-
-
Anyone recall around the start of the Rafa era, we had some numpty from Spurs come in here and give it the big 'un about how smalltime we were and how fucking amazing spurs were. I don't think I'm remembering this wrong but I'm pretty sure we went on to beat them 5-0 or something and he never returned. That guy has defined Spurs for me in every conceivable way, since that moment. I wonder how he's handling this
-
2
-
-
So there's quite a few of our lot falling on their swords in the guardian comment sections, 'can't support the club' etc, being roundly applauded by fans of other clubs who observe that they'd do the same thing if it were their club. This got me thinking a bit about where culpability ends here, in particular with respect of this 'damage to the brand' line. I would have thought that, with this being such a huge issue that transcends football etc etc, any other fan of any other club should be morally obligated to abandon the sport in protest. I mean if they pay their money to watch their team against us, they're as complicit in legitimising the regime as we are, no? Especially given that all of their clubs have just lined up to essentially point this out. The brand is being "damaged" by legitimising Saudi Arabia - therefore all principled fans should walk away from the entire sport.
Maybe I'm clutching at straws here though.
-
3
-
-
Doesn't Saudi own the Independent at least to a degree? Miguel Delaney actively taking blood money, nothing to see there.
-
3
-
-
What is it that they expect to achieve I wonder? Maybe it's entirely as they've said and they're outraged that they weren't involved in the decision making process this time around? Tbf they did appear to have a veto last time so this very much will be a slap in the face.
They can't cancel it and bitching about it like toddlers isn't going to get them anything though, so it is a bit bemusing.
-
Pleasingly it seems its an impotent gesture anyway.
What it will do however, is further convince the mackems that everyone will hate us and start loving them..!
-
"It is an absolute outrage that Newcastle have been permitted to become competitive, and the very idea that in this day and age there should be some modicum of challenge to the big 6 clubs strikes at the very heart of what football is all about - wealth and glory for an established elite!! Err, I mean, think of the brand!"
"Moreover, the fact that we weren't given time to subvert the deal somehow really is a shocking dereliction of duty by the PL..!"
-
4
-
3
-
-
I think it's fair to say this is what the PL was running from.
-
All other clubs united against the deal
-
9
-
-
Honestly I think this is probably the end of the local rivalry in any real sense. I mean who on our side is even going to care anymore. They're nothing to us now.
-
1
-
-
Just read Bruce will get an £8m payoff. £8m. For that. Fuck having sympathy for that, he should be the one sympathising with us!
-
DId he fuck turn down a higher offer
He'd have taken an offer that was 1p more than the Saudi one just on point of principle.
-
2
-
-
-
Just now, The Fish said:
Your view might be right but it's is largely conjecture. Even if my view is too.
Superb
-
I just enjoy the thought processes at stake anyway, I mean who fucking knows in the end - he might well be right. It's nice to be arguing about football related matters though, rather than politics
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, The Fish said:
But, from what I understand, the issues about piracy were intrinsically linked to the ownership issue. The state was pirating, so if the state was owning Newcastle then they'd fail the test. The previous separation assurances given by PIF weren't up to scratch, but, surprise surprise, the minute the piracy issue is resolved, these assurances are ok? Come on man.
This is capitalism at it's worst.
Ashley was just looking out for himself in all of this, regardless of what PIF and the PL were doing. Sure his court cases may have revealed something the PL didn't want revealed, but you're kidding yourself if you think they'd have caved had the piracy issue not been fixed.
I don't think they were intrinsically linked, or else why would they be continuing to make a fuss about the "clear separation" between state and PIF now, what with it having been resolved? They'd just say "well it doesn't matter anymore whether or not there is clear separation because the piracy issue is sorted between the parties concerned". The fact that they haven't said that is relevant. They have instead climbed down. And if they didn't need the clear separation argument for the piracy issue, then what did they need it for? I would say, they needed it as yet feather in their bow to stop this going through due to pressure from other clubs. Pressure that was fairly publicly revealed at the time as I recall.
I don't see how we can know the right of this either way - I can see your side of it but I'm sticking with my interpretation on this one, solely because of Ashley's movements. For your version to be right, he'd have to have basically ignored what all parties told him and just carried on with a court case on a whim. It's possible, but for a businessman of his stature, pretty fucking unlikely. It's far more likely that he knew he was being stitched up, and went after the people responsible. And PL ran scared and took the first respectable 'out' they could get their hands on.
-
2
-
-
Just now, The Fish said:
I think that there may be two issues that resolving the piracy issues fixed.
1. the Piracy issue
2. the legal cases would have revealed more than the PL wanted.
There wasn't a way to drop the cases without sorting the piracy issue.
Maybe. If that is true then the reason it took 18 months is because the geopolitical complications were resolved last week - which isn't something i'd put at PIF's door anyway.
But this very much looks like the PL capitulating to me (and it is just my opinion). If Ashley knew that it was just going to be a matter of piracy, he wouldn't have bothered taking the PL to court. If the PL were only bothered about piracy, they would have just said so instead of inventing problems about ownership. I think they had multiple reasons to block this of which piracy was a convenient excuse more than the root issue. It's the fact that Ashley went for them, called their bluff, that has forced this to change. And it's the reason why no one can provide any actually coherent argument as to why the ownership issue is now no longer an issue.
Without Ashley being a complete weapon about the whole thing, I don't think this would have happened. Nice that his cuntery actually worked out for us for once.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, The Fish said:
Do they?
This piracy issue could and should have been sorted 18 months ago. No red flags, remember?
When this first turned up, we were genuinely talking about Benitez or Pochettino. Now it surely has to be Conte, right?
I don't think the piracy actually was the main sticking point, it's just the acceptable climb down opportunity. IMO the PL probably did resist this on the ownership grounds/pressure from other clubs but didn't expect Ashley to come after them like he did. They've caved in the face of being forced to relent IMO.
Newcastle United Fan Steve Bruce clings on for as much compensation as possible
in Newcastle Forum
Posted
Keegan going back would be the stuff of dreams. Not as a manager or DoF, but as a way of joining pre-Ashley with post-Ashley. It'd be a huge moment to rally everyone around the club and really underline how, whatever happens from here, this isn't going to be the soulless march to success that City and PSG have embarked on.