Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.

redcucumber

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2022
Messages
3,186
I do think there is another camp, maybe a 1.5, although they'll prove short-lived.

Those resigned to the lack of realistic good outcomes. They hope some mythical benign billionaire will appear, but know this is unlikely.

They love the club and find state ownership embodies a lot of what they hate about modern football, sportswashing etc included. But they don't how they'll really feel two years down the line.
Can we live with the ownership if the club is just allowed to spend it's own money, unlike under the Glazers, or will the new owners diminish their love so their interest fades over time. That I don't know.
This is where I sit.
 

Telsim

Full Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2021
Messages
4,761
If they do not sell, we will have a pretty shite transfer window and the team won't be strengthened properly. Hopefully, there will be huge protests.
Hasn't happened in 17 years, except when coordinated with other clubs regarding the Super League. It's not going to happen now. They don't give a shit about protests. And I doubt any protests would ever take place regarding this. The fanbase would already be split if the options are between Glazers staying and Qatar. There will be no protests of any consequence.
 

tenpoless

No 6-pack, just 2Pac
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
16,272
Location
Fabinho's forehead
Not really, if the playing field is level then it is healthiest for competition, as much as I am am through and through a utd fan, I would not want to be massively dominant it becomes boring, I know I will take pelters, there were times under SAF where success became a bit meh! what makes the prem the best is the competition from top to bottom, there are no real gimmies!
Yes but I dont want the club having to pay stupid money for players because other clubs are also doing it. We have seen it with Chelsea already. Its the perfect time for Ten Hag to build something special, less competition for players signatures the better.
 

crossy1686

career ending
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
31,611
Location
Manchester/Stockholm
Yep, I can't promise I'd walk away after over 35 years supporting the club, but I really it doesn't become like fantasy football, turning any future success instantly hollow.
In what way? We still can't outspend our means otherwise we'll end up where City are now or kicked out of the CL. If we're only spending what we generate how does that make success hollow?

And even if it does feel hollow right now, in the next 20 years most PL clubs are going to be owned by some form of state or multi billion dollar investment vehicle.
 

Water Melon

Guest
If the Glazers sell to a client from ME, you can bet that in 1year's time, the club will be in a much healthier financial state than it has been the past 15 years. In 3years time we will be on the very top of the football world. In the meantime, number of United fans will increase, while Qatar continues to sell gas to and buy arms from UK.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
Not really, if the playing field is level then it is healthiest for competition, as much as I am am through and through a utd fan, I would not want to be massively dominant it becomes boring, I know I will take pelters, there were times under SAF where success became a bit meh! what makes the prem the best is the competition from top to bottom, there are no real gimmies!
I thought this as well but I don’t think anybody would ever be so far ahead of second on a consistent basis. Look how close City are / were to losing titles to non oil clubs that simply came down to who they can bring off the bench.
I’m not sure anybody who was best in the world have been miles ahead of number 2 in the world and in turn 3rd etc. these teams were just spread across Europe. What will make the EPL different, and what sucks for the rest of football, is that these teams will all be in one league competing against each other because they simply have to. That will add the flavour of genuine competition
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,322
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
In what way? We still can't outspend our means otherwise we'll end up where City are now or kicked out of the CL. If we're only spending what we generate how does that make success hollow?

And even if it does feel hollow right now, in the next 20 years most PL clubs are going to be owned by some form of state or multi billion dollar investment vehicle.
You misread me. I said I'd rather we spent what we generate, not get some massive cash injection to buy Mbappe et al. Can't say I have much faith in FFP given Chelsea and PSG's spending, regardless of what's going on with City.

I'm not pretending it's a consistent view either. We have a debt problem and OT is falling apart. Trying to juggle all that with your distaste for state owners is admittedly tricky. Something has to give somewhere.
 

crossy1686

career ending
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
31,611
Location
Manchester/Stockholm
You misread me. I said I'd rather we spent what we generate, not get some massive cash injection to buy Mbappe et al. Can't say I have much faith in FFP given Chelsea and PSG's spending, regardless of what's going on with City.

I'm not pretending it's a consistent view either. We have a debt problem and OT is falling apart. Trying to juggle all that with your distaste for state owners is admittedly tricky. Something has to give somewhere.
If you look at Newcastle, it seems that any potential state owners are being told about spending regulations upon involvement. City have blatantly cheated and Chelsea think they've found a loophole in offering their players 20 year contracts and spending whatever they want, at some point that will blow up in their face.

If we were to go the same route of City we'd get absolutely hammered from day one, the rest of the league will make sure of that, in fact I'd be surprised if there wasn't some new ruling brought in regarding the amount you can spend in one window if we ever become state owned.

We've been lucky, a club with any less statue or revenue than United wouldn't have survived the Glazer ownership and only fell as low as 6 over the last 10 years, not only that, the club has stalled on it's commercial revenue for the last 7 or 8 years, there's still way more growth to be had but the Glazers and Woodward just gave up until it was time to sell.

Plus, if we do become state owned and the PL fail in their bid to put City in their place at least we'll be able to compete with them. If not we're looking at decades of City dominance.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,557
I can't believe people saying they rather keep Glazers than Qatar as owners. It also depends what you want your football club to do.

In my view, Manchester United is one of the top 5 clubs in the world. That means you have to have standards.

1. Top tier infrastructure - United fail at that
2. Top tier stadium - united fail at that
3. Top tier training facilities - United fail at that
4. Top tier footballing structure - United fail at that.

Add to that, we have spent more money in the last 10 years than any other club.
We have the most debt.

That is what the glazers give you.

Look at City, since the take over, they have invested heavily in their training ground, attract the best young talent now, their academy sells players like Lavia for £15m without playing a game.

Look at the investment into the area as well.

Everyone going on about human rights, it is correct in what people say but things are changing, even in these countries, things are changing.

How many of the people against the middle east countries taking us over have used one of their airlines?
 

Strelok

New Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2018
Messages
5,279
I find this thread interesting; logged in for the first time in years to give some thoughts. There's a lot of somewhat understandable mental gymnastics going on, and the place seems to be split into a few camps.

1. Those wanting to take a stand - These people would generally rather see the club in debt and struggling, than a sportswashing regime take over. If the US or Israeli government bid, they'd probably hold the same view. They either hate state ownership, or slave workers, or lack of womens rights, or general sportswashing. But their view is on principle. For some if it happens, that's the club dead to them.

2. Those 'resigned' to the fact we'll be taken over by somebody, and they probably won't be a good guy. It doesn't sit comfortable, but they love the club, and they'd rather be rich and win than poor and lose so support a ME bid. They may make some light justifications like 'maybe we can improve rights in qatar etc'. They will continue to support the club and bear the owners through grit teeth.

3. Those who don't care, they just want to win. Bring on the richest bidder. Maybe they'll wear some nice ME clothes after the takeover like the Newcastle fans did.

4. Those who are cheerleading for the ME, and using the discomfort in the first two groups to accuse of xenophobia, racism, etc etc. It's strange to me, as it's blindingly obvious that if the state of israel made a bid, they would have a collective aneurism and suddenly be in camp one. I don't really understand why this group isn't simply in camp 3, and instead are attempting to recreate a reality that the ME are good guys and their culture is no more distasteful than ours.

In short, it seems some people are cashing in on the ME interest to advance ME political interests and discourse, which I find weird as hell. There should be absolutely no reason to attempt to defend Qatar and its human rights records etc; simply don't respond. But a group of people are going out of their way to interact and attack groups one and two and recreate reality. It's become a political football in the football forum...

I don't know what to think of it all really. And I'm probably shamefully in camp 2. I won't stop supporting the club or watching etc.
Very good post. But imo there is probably another group:

5. Those who continue to support and watch the club despite knowing fully well how evil the Qataries royals are and all their wrong doings. There is no 'but' or 'if'. Just because they love the club and can't quit watching or have nothing better to do in the weekends. Like you continue to smoke despite knowing smoking will kill you. I belong to this group and I smoke too.
 

Adam-Utd

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
39,954
Yep, I can't promise I'd walk away after over 35 years supporting the club, but I really it doesn't become like fantasy football, turning any future success instantly hollow.
This is just the way premier league football is now.

There's actually more Billionaire owners of PL clubs than there is not.

It gets to a point where being Rich isn't enough. Is United being bought by a rich owner enough to make us win? no.

If we get success it's because we deserve it. FFP rules are going to mean the club can only spend a certain amount anyway, nobody will be blowing 500m a season etc.
 

Ottawa MLS Fan

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 4, 2013
Messages
127
If the options are Elon and the Qataris, I'd rather stick with the Glazers tbh. At least we know what the Glazers are up to
I understand where you’re coming from, but we can see the trajectory of the Glazer’s ownership. Infrastructure is decaying, and while it can be patched, there will come a time when serious money needs to be spent. Based on their time to date the Glazers are unlikely to spend the 1-2B needed out of their own money and I don’t see how they can add that amount to the existing club debt.

A few years ago I would have been excited by Musk buying United. Great sponsorship opportunities from his other companies (at fair market value, of course), the best tech and some off-the-wall ideas to move football forwards. However, his takeover of Twitter has been unhinged and I dread those type of decisions at United and the damage they could do.

For me, and purely from the perspective of running the club (leaving other issues with their ownership for other threads), Qatar is much the best option of the ones you mention. I would expect that they will remove the debt, take no dividends and address the infrastructure issues. Hopefully they will also know what a gem they have in ETH and will back him with the players he wants rather than the biggest names.
 

CantonaManc

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 23, 2022
Messages
1,536
Location
See where they play, how they play, if they play..
Supports
ETH's tricky reds
I don't know why people are rattled by the Qatari news.

This are the best news from a long time and finally we can see the end of Glazers - LETS HOPE

I don't understand with what Qatar are different to other owners like SJR or the US Consortiums and people dislike them. Nowadays i don't see a better owner than them and i am not even joking.

Qatar will get to own 1 of the biggest club in world possibly the biggest and we the fans will get to watch a squad, a stadium, and facilities deserving of the club.

Stop living in the past and accept that there is nothing wrong to have Middle East owners which will want only the best for the club.

They know that they will have a big task in front of them and will make sure that our fans will be delighted by their plan and will show to us their investment plan for the whole club from facilities to new stadium, backing the manager etc .

Love the hypocrisy of fans on here, giving it Mr Big Balls “if this happens that’s me done as supporter, human rights migrants slaves blah fecking blah” while typing on their iPhone and wearing a pair of Nikes. Take a stance on your soap box, but I guess only when it’s a convenient height

We are not Man City, we already have the revenue and money-generation to operate like a big spending club and still be within FFP. What's stopping us right now is the insane debt, which was never ours to begin with (obligatory feck The Glazers), and would be wiped by a sale anyway. We could spend without fear of failing. That's how these state clubs just break the game. At current with the way we've been run United should be entering a sharp decline. We're in massive debt, can't afford new infrastructure, and have no cash in the bank to build on success. If we were not being sold the next few years could be bleak.

City had to make up ground where we don’t. Just sort out OT, clear up the debt and we’re good.

In fact, this could be pretty significant for foreign investment. Qatar might use this as an opportunity to say that they don’t have to cook the books every time, making them look good compared to the rest of the GCC.

In the END, All I want is that the new owners would invest money in our infrastructure, clear the debts and not take money out of the club. If it's gonna be the Qataris, then so be it. Man Utd under ETH with oil money will be depressingly scary. :devil::devil:

If this goes through and takes us back to the top of world football I might start taking domestic flights via Doha to thank them. We've been waiting 15yrs or so for the Glazers to feck off !!! Imagine if they decide not to sell because the bid is too low and they stay again WOW the uproar against them will be enormous.

In the end it’ll be good for the club and people will change their opinion about Qatar way faster than someone would expect.

Viva Qatar, Viva Al Thani !
 

owlo

Full Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
3,252
A lot of the people in camp four are working/living in the ME from reading the thread. Great summary though.
True, and perhaps its emblematic of the possiblity that free thinking is not acceptable in the ME outside of groupthink.

I live in the UK and hate the Tories. I lived in Israel and hate the government and the way they treat the Palestinians. And Iran is my absolutely favourite place in the world, but I hope the regime crashes and burns and society rises from the ashes.

Great post. I am mix between 2 and 3. I am fine with Qatar winning out and have said as much in this thread. I sadly, got drawn into the slop with #4 when they told me I am scared to send my kids to school, walk around my town at night, etc.., etc...
Wouldn't blame yourself mate. I think it's an intended function of the bid/purchase to mobilise these fans with such sympathies to advocate for them, vertically integrating their ideology in there slowly but surely because we're already fans. We've seen it at City with them coming together over time, when at the start a lot of them called out the ridiculous statements for well, being ridiculous.

As others have mentioned, good post and also fair fecks to admitting being in camp 2. Count me in there too. Although I am not particularly ashamed for it. I don't see an issue in being critical about Qatar's politics and huge human rights issues whilst still accepting that there's a huge chance they'll be the new owners of the football club I love and hoping they'll do the best for this club.
Yea I think it's difficult in a consumer world like ours to honestly say that you'll take a stand without being or feeling hypocritical. 60% of the worlds solar panels or something are made by chinese slaves, but i'll still buy them to help the environment. We still buy flagship smartphones etc etc. We do what we do to

Were I the perfect man, I'd be in #1. It would be a hard limit and I'd be protesting it and not support the club if it went ahead. But I like football, the club, my quiet life. Were I the perfect man, I'd probably also be off fighting in Syria or Ukraine.

I do think there is another camp, maybe a 1.5, although they'll prove short-lived.

Those resigned to the lack of realistic good outcomes. They hope some mythical benign billionaire will appear, but know this is unlikely.

They love the club and find state ownership embodies a lot of what they hate about modern football, sportswashing etc included. But they don't how they'll really feel two years down the line.
Can we live with the ownership if the club is just allowed to spend it's own money, unlike under the Glazers, or will the new owners diminish their love so their interest fades over time. That I don't know.
I'm no psychologist, but as I mentioned shortly above I think this is kind of a function of them buying/bidding for the club. Stage one is to buy and their fanboys will harp on, integrating with the other fans. They'll do 'good' for the club, for the city. Let us spend our own money. Knowing that for many fans who have that bitter taste in their mouth it's still a lifestyle, an addiction. Slowly move us down until we really don't care, and we're singing from the same hymm sheet. The ones who were originally mad at it in reluctant acceptance, whilst the ones who didn't care from the start move to full on shill mode.

I honestly think we're seeing this now with City. They are becoming more and more full throated in their support.

I don't think our interest will diminish? It's still our club. The same boys/girls, the same managers. We'll just be more... empty perhaps? When we win or in general, who knows.

As for some mythical billionaire; though I'd love Mackenzie Scott to swoop in to put a finger up at Bezos, I only really see 2 viable options and I'm not sure how serious about us either would be. (And no Ineos isn't viable for me) [for reference: my idea of viable is defined by "rich enough for the club to be a hedge, and cash rich enough to plough cash into the club for a decade without caring for anything but capital gains"]
 

Son

Full Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
1,695
I don't get why people argue this. Manchester United was founded by railway workers from a working class industrialised city ... Manchester. Some of your biggest names from United history spoke out for socialism, Busby talked about the Great Strike of 1926 and the effect it had on him and his core socialist values. SAF was again from a working class background, the docks in Glasgow and is a staunch Labour supporter.

English football as a whole, especially in the north of England has been intimately tied with social issues, the working class and left wing politics for more than a hundred years. As has the city of Manchester.

People and posters will all have different opinions, but being taken over by an elite, ruling family that has little interest in the working class and workers is an anathema to United's rich history. The history of a club is not just trophies, it's its place in the community and its standing as a community asset. Manchester United and indeed most English football clubs have always been about a lot more than, splashing cash on the latest star and winning, it's also about the values of the community and people it represents.

For me to to break away from that so completely is really very sad.
Very well said and more eloquently put than I could write. Bravo.

United and Liverpool have always been the most socialist of institutions in English football basically. It’s in our DNA and part of what sets us apart from the Real Madrid’s of this world for example.
 

croadyman

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
34,514
I can't believe people saying they rather keep Glazers than Qatar as owners. It also depends what you want your football club to do.

In my view, Manchester United is one of the top 5 clubs in the world. That means you have to have standards.

1. Top tier infrastructure - United fail at that
2. Top tier stadium - united fail at that
3. Top tier training facilities - United fail at that
4. Top tier footballing structure - United fail at that.

Add to that, we have spent more money in the last 10 years than any other club.
We have the most debt.

That is what the glazers give you.

Look at City, since the take over, they have invested heavily in their training ground, attract the best young talent now, their academy sells players like Lavia for £15m without playing a game.

Look at the investment into the area as well.

Everyone going on about human rights, it is correct in what people say but things are changing, even in these countries, things are changing.

How many of the people against the middle east countries taking us over have used one of their airlines?
Very measured post
 

11101

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
21,248
That's fair enough but you are closing the barn door after the horses have already bolted. If United don't get a rich owner who is prepared to change the Glazer business model then the only way is down and the road back up is arduous and uncertain. We all know what happened to Leeds and the likes of Nottingham Forrest.

The funny thing is that most of these nasty pieces of shite have been enabled by Western governments. They were willing to overlook the barbarism as long as the oil kept flowing and the proceeds invested in Cities like London so its shocking to see the revulsion at the ownership of a football club by people who have more or less kept the wheels turning and who have been enabled and protected by governments your society votes for. Do you think the House of Saud would have survived this long without Western protection?
Maybe it is closing the barn door after the horse has already bolted, but that's no reason not to take a stand. I don't care what City do and their titles and rivalry mean nothing to me, and I'll feel largely the same about ours if we clean up with a team resembling the Harlem Globetrotters.

Make no mistake these regimes may have tentacles in London but they are still minor players on the global stage. They have a single trump card, oil, which the world is moving away from, and that's why they're desperately trying to gain legitimacy and build their profiles up.
 

KiD MoYeS

Good Craig got his c'nuppins
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
32,918
Location
Love is Blind
One thing to consider about the apparent Tottenham valuation - they don't need any work done to their stadium. Old Trafford will be a significant outlay for new Man Utd owners - likely reducing the buying value.
 

FrankFoot

Full Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2022
Messages
1,377
Location
Chile / Czech Republic
Supports
Neutral
Depends on which party is running it, the political threads tend to shit on the wackadoos, which are almost always of the Republican nature
And that wrong, cause Democrats are garbage as well, i as a non-american don't have any bias, Democrats have bombed/killed as many people in the ME region as Republicans (probably a bit more considering how many drones Obama and Biden dropped in Syria).

Choosing one side cause ones look more progressive at home seems clueless, both parties have history of bombing countries and putting dictators in power here and there, just cause ones wear rainbow flags doesn't make them any better, neither this will matter to the families of all the people they have murdered.
 

Dion

Full Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
4,336
Very measured post
It's still crap whataboutism. Nobody against Qatar is against it because they think it doesn't benefit the club financially. The only other argument in there is 'I bet you use their airline', as if state funded transport amenities is remotely the same ball park as state funded football clubs.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
One thing to consider about the apparent Tottenham valuation - they don't need any work done to their stadium. Old Trafford will be a significant outlay for new Man Utd owners - likely reducing the buying value.
It still needs paying off though. That’s where the 750m debt comes from
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,557
Very measured post
In my opinion, the reason everyone is so against Middle east is because of all the negative media that has surrounded them in the last few years.

Everyone says oil money, well that's how they make money, so why not spend it? Why is oil money dirty?

Say for example INEOS / American owners, people do not scrutinise them to the extent they do with middle east owners, why? Do we know how these people make their billions?

What I have seen is, the middle east owners will put the right people in charge to win, whilst investing in and around Manchester.

We could have a state of the art stadium.
 

Dion

Full Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
4,336
And that wrong, cause Democrats are garbage as well, i as a non-american don't have any bias, Democrats have bombed/killed as many people in the ME region as Republicans (probably a bit more considering how many drones Obama and Biden dropped in Syria).

Choosing one side cause ones look more progressive at home seems clueless, both parties have history of bombing countries and putting dictators in power here and there, just cause ones wear rainbow flags doesn't make them any better, neither this will matter to the families of all the people they have murdered.
I'd like to see some evidence for your claim that Obama and Biden have killed more people than Bush, let alone Bush and Trump.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,557
It's still crap whataboutism. Nobody against Qatar is against it because they think it doesn't benefit the club financially. The only other argument in there is 'I bet you use their airline', as if state funded transport amenities is remotely the same ball park as state funded football clubs.
Okay, so let me ask you, you are against Qatar because?
 

Dion

Full Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
4,336
In my opinion, the reason everyone is so against Middle east is because of all the negative media that has surrounded them in the last few years.

Everyone says oil money, well that's how they make money, so why not spend it? Why is oil money dirty?

Say for example INEOS / American owners, people do not scrutinise them to the extent they do with middle east owners, why? Do we know how these people make their billions?

What I have seen is, the middle east owners will put the right people in charge to win, whilst investing in and around Manchester.

We could have a state of the art stadium.
States have all kinds of powers to abuse which aren't available to private individuals. It's impossible to ignore this and disingenuous to pretend it isn't an issue.

It's not a case of bad PR, it's fundamentally wrong.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,557
States shouldn't own football clubs. It's morally reprehensible.
But you think we will be state owned. Alot of talk has said it is private individuals that will bid not the state, so where is the issue in that?
 

croadyman

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
34,514
In my opinion, the reason everyone is so against Middle east is because of all the negative media that has surrounded them in the last few years.

Everyone says oil money, well that's how they make money, so why not spend it? Why is oil money dirty?

Say for example INEOS / American owners, people do not scrutinise them to the extent they do with middle east owners, why? Do we know how these people make their billions?

What I have seen is, the middle east owners will put the right people in charge to win, whilst investing in and around Manchester.

We could have a state of the art stadium.
I also think people are very against the fact that they don't treat everyone as equal,so there is concern of how will our LGBTQ+ and women's team feel about Qatar owning the club
 

Dion

Full Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
4,336
But you think we will be state owned. Alot of talk has said it is private individuals that will bid not the state, so where is the issue in that?
State actors using state funds to get around dual ownership rules is state ownership. The mental gymnastics required to deny that to yourself is incredible.
 

BerryBerryShrew

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
1,534
I find this thread interesting; logged in for the first time in years to give some thoughts. There's a lot of somewhat understandable mental gymnastics going on, and the place seems to be split into a few camps.

1. Those wanting to take a stand - These people would generally rather see the club in debt and struggling, than a sportswashing regime take over. If the US or Israeli government bid, they'd probably hold the same view. They either hate state ownership, or slave workers, or lack of womens rights, or general sportswashing. But their view is on principle. For some if it happens, that's the club dead to them.

2. Those 'resigned' to the fact we'll be taken over by somebody, and they probably won't be a good guy. It doesn't sit comfortable, but they love the club, and they'd rather be rich and win than poor and lose so support a ME bid. They may make some light justifications like 'maybe we can improve rights in qatar etc'. They will continue to support the club and bear the owners through grit teeth.

3. Those who don't care, they just want to win. Bring on the richest bidder. Maybe they'll wear some nice ME clothes after the takeover like the Newcastle fans did.

4. Those who are cheerleading for the ME, and using the discomfort in the first two groups to accuse of xenophobia, racism, etc etc. It's strange to me, as it's blindingly obvious that if the state of israel made a bid, they would have a collective aneurism and suddenly be in camp one. I don't really understand why this group isn't simply in camp 3, and instead are attempting to recreate a reality that the ME are good guys and their culture is no more distasteful than ours.

In short, it seems some people are cashing in on the ME interest to advance ME political interests and discourse, which I find weird as hell. There should be absolutely no reason to attempt to defend Qatar and its human rights records etc; simply don't respond. But a group of people are going out of their way to interact and attack groups one and two and recreate reality. It's become a political football in the football forum...

I don't know what to think of it all really. And I'm probably shamefully in camp 2. I won't stop supporting the club or watching etc.
You should log in more often- brilliant post. Agree completely.
 

Judas

Open to offers
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
36,006
Location
Where the grass is greener.
I also think people are very against the fact that they don't treat everyone as equal,so there is concern of how will our LGBTQ+ and women's team feel about Qatar owning the club
I think overall that’s one of the key issue, seems either naive or purposefully disingenuous to pretend the issue people have is with where the money comes from.

But then that poster was convinced City were in trouble due to the length of their grass, so……..
 

BerryBerryShrew

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
1,534
I don't get why people argue this. Manchester United was founded by railway workers from a working class industrialised city ... Manchester. Some of your biggest names from United history spoke out for socialism, Busby talked about the Great Strike of 1926 and the effect it had on him and his core socialist values. SAF was again from a working class background, the docks in Glasgow and is a staunch Labour supporter.

English football as a whole, especially in the north of England has been intimately tied with social issues, the working class and left wing politics for more than a hundred years. As has the city of Manchester.

People and posters will all have different opinions, but being taken over by an elite, ruling family that has little interest in the working class and workers is an anathema to United's rich history. The history of a club is not just trophies, it's its place in the community and its standing as a community asset. Manchester United and indeed most English football clubs have always been about a lot more than, splashing cash on the latest star and winning, it's also about the values of the community and people it represents.

For me to to break away from that so completely is really very sad.
Nail on head- great post.
 

MTF

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,243
Location
New York City
But you think we will be state owned. Alot of talk has said it is private individuals that will bid not the state, so where is the issue in that?
There are no private individuals with this kind of wealth that aren't associated to the royal family there.
 

croadyman

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
34,514
I think overall that’s one of the key issue, seems either naive or purposefully disingenuous to pretend the issue people have is with where the money comes from.

But then that poster was convinced City were in trouble due to the length of their grass, so……..
Yeah I am trying my best to see both sides on this. I also believe that the country is probably trying to improve their acceptance towards women and LGBTQ but know saying that looks like I'm trying to defend them
 

Bosws87

Full Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2015
Messages
3,714
I don't get why people argue this. Manchester United was founded by railway workers from a working class industrialised city ... Manchester. Some of your biggest names from United history spoke out for socialism, Busby talked about the Great Strike of 1926 and the effect it had on him and his core socialist values. SAF was again from a working class background, the docks in Glasgow and is a staunch Labour supporter.

English football as a whole, especially in the north of England has been intimately tied with social issues, the working class and left wing politics for more than a hundred years. As has the city of Manchester.

People and posters will all have different opinions, but being taken over by an elite, ruling family that has little interest in the working class and workers is an anathema to United's rich history. The history of a club is not just trophies, it's its place in the community and its standing as a community asset. Manchester United and indeed most English football clubs have always been about a lot more than, splashing cash on the latest star and winning, it's also about the values of the community and people it represents.

For me to to break away from that so completely is really very sad.
Lets be honest here, that was lost a long time ago its not the new owners that saw to that, its football as a whole at the top elite level.

United haven't been the working class club for decades and they can't and never will if they want to stay at the top of football.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.