Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

[Football] Liverpool set for "monstrous takeover" bid from Qatar in February



D

Deleted member 37369

Well-known member
Aug 21, 2018
1,994
The Fish said:
For the past 14yrs we'd been a billboard for Sports Direct. These owners are vile and the PL, the Government or the FA should have stopped it from happening. But they don't care. And of course, it's the fans who are criticised despite having no say in it. Mind, you're kidding yourself if you think there any many Premier League clubs that are their fans' club. Man City, Arsenal, Leicester, and so on, they're not the local clubs they once were. When Bloom sells you, it won't be to a local Brighton fan will it? That's just the nature of late stage capitalism and a succession of Governments who don't understand football's place in our culture.

It's hard to explain to fans of other clubs how bleak it was under Ashley. Especially to fans of clubs who've really had it bad. Newcastle have never been in the third tier, not been in financial difficulty since the PL was formed, not had threats of administration or winding up orders. So how could we moan? Well, for me it was an existential issue. After decades of supporting us through the good and bad, I found myself not caring. Stay up or go down, who cares? NUFC wouldn't try in the cups, wouldn't try in the league once survival/promotion was guaranteed. Didn't invest in local talent. It was nothing. The rotting corpse of a pigeon hanging in the netting above the stand, wires dangling from the tv brackets in the concourse, windows that hadn't been washed in years. Ashley didn't kill my club, he just put it in a financially induced coma. A zombie club, existing to exist.

I say this to try and give a sense of the desperation on Tyneside. Those scenes you maybe saw outside St James' when the takeover was announced, they would 100% have been replicated had the new owners been from South America, or some faceless multinational hedge fund, or that rarest of breeds, a local boy done good. We didn't want the Saudis in, we wanted Ashley out. The Athletic ran a poll and worded the question like "Are you in favour of the Saudi takeover", overwhelmingly the respondents said yes. Because that was the only horse in town. If the Orleggi group had rocked up with a £300m bid you better believe we would have preferred that one.

Every time we sign someone, any time we succeed, if we ever win something the ownership will be brought up. And it absolutely should. Questions should be asked, but asked of those with the power to make change; the FA, the PL, the Government.
Click to expand...
I’ve enjoyed reading your posts. Great points and well argued. The point you made about net spend and not yet being in a position to offload players to recoup some of your spend had already gone through my head.
 




T

The Fish

Exiled Geordie
Jan 5, 2017
382
Stato said:
It's all about the money. You wouldn't have feel good factor without the money. You wouldn't have the people you credit without the money. Eddie Howe wouldn't have taken the job without the money, Ashworth wouldn't have left us if not for the money, Darren Eales wouldn't have left Atlanta United except: the money.

You were 10th highest net transfer spenders in 20/21, one window of Saudi cash had you leaping to second highest spenders in 21/22, and one and a bit windows currently has you fourth highest in 22/23. Newcastle's transfer balance over the last 10 years is -£439,250,000 and 60% of that has been spent in the two windows since the Saudis took over and brought with them, yes you guessed it, the money.

Wages are an even larger issue. Brighton get beaten up by some complaining fans every window because they don't sign a striker. This isn't because they don't try or can't afford the transfer fee, its because of the wage structure not meeting the demands of top strikers. The moment that the Saudis took over, the wage structure stopped being an issue for Newcastle. The existing players that you mention as being instrumental in the improvement are all playing for their places in a club that can now afford to offer them new deals that would be beyond their wildest dreams before the money.

Take a look at Howe's results before and after the winter transfer window in 2021/22 and then try to tell us its not all about the money. A point a game in the ten matches between Howe starting after the draw with us and the opening of the transfer window. 2 points per game in the 36 games that began with Trippier's first league appearance, the first time you'd been able to spend the money.

There was a sign of what you'd be without the money this month when you were knocked out of the FA Cup by a Division One side, with a starting line up of pretty much players who would all still be EPL starters if it wan't for the money. Players who still can't beat Sheffield Wednesday after being managed by Eddie Howe for eighteen months.

Enjoy your success by all means. After all, once your club has sold its soul, success is all you really have. Don't fool yourself though:

If you hadn't gone down last year, you'd currently be in a relegation battle if not for the money.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that's massively reductive.

We would have had a feel good factor without the blood money, because we'd got rid of Ashley. Eddie Howe was unemployed and left his most recent post after relegation. Johnny NewOwner could definitely have appointed him. You're right that Ashworth would have needed to have been lured by a project, but DoF wages aren't huge to a Premier League side. Same is true for a new CEO like Eales. Sure, it's money, but it's not absurd money, it's Premier League money.

The wage issue remains an issue. FFP means we cannot explode our wage structure. So that's nonsense.

Your supposition that the existing players are performing well purely because there's the potential for new contracts is reductive and ignores the greater likelihood; they're not getting new deals, they're being jettisoned.

Again, it's reductive to claim that the uptick in form was because of money. It suggests that signing of Trippier (who actually only played 5 games in 21/22), Bruno (who played 11 games), Brighton's 3rd choice CB, Chris Wood and loaning Target was somehow a cheat code. All of those players were available to others. The uptick was because Eddie Howe unpicked the chaos of Bruce's 'system' and rebuilt the team into a cohesive unit.

Cup exits happen. I'm not biting on that one.

Blame money if it gives you comfort, but the truth of the matter is that Newcastle United are currently being run well, and well within our means. If you want to see further proof that spending money isn't a guarantee of anything, look at Everton, or Chelsea, or West Ham.
 


T

The Fish

Exiled Geordie
Jan 5, 2017
382
Berty23 said:
I prefer nett spent tbh. Leics made some big sales right?

Almiron signed as club record fee. https://www.skysports.com/football/...miron-from-atlanta-united-for-club-record-fee

Joelinton signed for a club record fee. https://www.skysports.com/amp/footb...inton-from-hoffenheim-in-40m-club-record-deal

Almiron had a little bit of Rafa didn’t he and then Bruce? It is quite common players take time to settle in the league etc.

Remember don’t just look at wages. You need to look at wages etc too.

I agree other clubs should do well. I guess my position is skewed by being a Brighton fan where we pay relatively low wages and destroy Liverpool with a side costing c30 million. Plus being a place where other managers who want success park the bus. To be fair to Eddie. The signing of Pope who was incredible, tactics of parking the bus and the tactics of time wasting from the first whistle at the Amex were perfect. So maybe I am being a little harsh.

If Newcastle get top four then I hope they sign Kane just to annoy all my spurs supporting mates. That would be very funny.
Click to expand...

Yeah Almiron had half a season under Benitez and he looked a player, but then Rondon wasn't signed, Perez was sold and suddenly the poor lad was trying to work under Bruce.
Joelinton was signed for an eyewatering sum and Bruce played him as an isolated striker whenit was clear to anyone with half a brain Joelinton is not a targetman.

Brighton are the blueprint for clubs, imo. You and Brentford. Excellent recruitment, good short and long term planning. Joined up planning.

We're Atletico Madrid-ing our way to whatever success that brings.
 


T

The Fish

Exiled Geordie
Jan 5, 2017
382
Berty23 said:
Siri. Can you define sportwashing for me?

As you say. Probably best looking elsewhere for sympathy after the last 30 years at Brighton!
Click to expand...

Sadly that why Sportswashing works. I hate the fact that all of this is now, and forever will be, followed by a big old asterisk. All of this could have been achieved under different owners. The journalists will stop writing about it as they have with Man City, the opposition fans criticisms will dull, the focus will shift.

I'll never defend the owners, they're vile. Said it often on here already. I will defend the fans, the men and women who work for the club, the team. But the owners can rot, for all I care.
 


B

Berty23

Well-known member
Jun 26, 2012
3,210
The Fish said:
Yeah Almiron had half a season under Benitez and he looked a player, but then Rondon wasn't signed, Perez was sold and suddenly the poor lad was trying to work under Bruce.
Joelinton was signed for an eyewatering sum and Bruce played him as an isolated striker whenit was clear to anyone with half a brain Joelinton is not a targetman.

Brighton are the blueprint for clubs, imo. You and Brentford. Excellent recruitment, good short and long term planning. Joined up planning.

We're Atletico Madrid-ing our way to whatever success that brings.
Click to expand...
I will be amazed if after another year you are still spending half as much on wages as the other higher spenders (which is was athletico do).
 






B

Berty23

Well-known member
Jun 26, 2012
3,210
The Fish said:
Sadly that why Sportswashing works. I hate the fact that all of this is now, and forever will be, followed by a big old asterisk. All of this could have been achieved under different owners. The journalists will stop writing about it as they have with Man City, the opposition fans criticisms will dull, the focus will shift.

I'll never defend the owners, they're vile. Said it often on here already. I will defend the fans, the men and women who work for the club, the team. But the owners can rot, for all I care.
Click to expand...
I disagree all this would have happened under different owners. You don’t know that. The attraction of a bottomless pit of cash lures lots of people the the project. If they can park the source of their funds from their mind then the amount of it means they can get people. Maybe it would have under another mega rich owner but would ashworth have left us?

No other buyers were about so fans took whatever they could. I get it. I just wish that fans were not afraid to admit that a country with shocking human rights record is using their club to clean reputation of their country. They see football as a vehicle to make their behaviour okay and every fan who says “yeah they are bad BUT…” should remember that anything before the but is BS.
 


Stato

Stato

Well-known member
Dec 21, 2011
6,607
The Fish said:
It's hard to explain to fans of other clubs how bleak it was under Ashley. Especially to fans of clubs who've really had it bad.
Click to expand...
And have you considered why that, in particular, seems hard?

During the period from 2007/08 to 2021/22 when he was Newcastle's chairman, Newcastle were the tenth highest net spenders in English football, with only the big six, Villa, Everton and West Ham spending more.

We know that you didn't like him. We can't blame you for that. Not many people like him. He wasn't very good at spending his money, but as owners go many, many of us in English football have more than 'he's a useless, seemingly uninterested cockney' to complain about when speaking of our former owners.

Some of us are old enough to remember Newcastle United before John Hall's financial wranglings. When we got promoted to the top tier for the first time it was with a win at St James Park, home of a mid-table tier two team, who spent over half of that decade outside of the top level. There's no disgrace in that. Football is enjoyed at all levels, just not by those obsessed with a belief that they are entitled to something better.
 




T

The Fish

Exiled Geordie
Jan 5, 2017
382
Berty23 said:
I will be amazed if after another year you are still spending half as much on wages as the other higher spenders (which is was athletico do).
Click to expand...
No, we likely won't. As our commercial revenue increases so to will our ability to pay the bigger wages. We'll need to pay the PL tax that Atletico don't, we'll need to pay a Newcastle tax too. And of course we'll need to convince top players to move to the North East of England and in a toss up between Madrid and Newcastle for a CL-level player, I'm afraid not even parochial bias will allow to claim a win there. So money for that as well. But it has ever been thus.
 


T

The Fish

Exiled Geordie
Jan 5, 2017
382
Berty23 said:
I disagree all this would have happened under different owners. You don’t know that. The attraction of a bottomless pit of cash lures lots of people the the project. If they can park the source of their funds from their mind then the amount of it means they can get people. Maybe it would have under another mega rich owner but would ashworth have left us?

No other buyers were about so fans took whatever they could. I get it. I just wish that fans were not afraid to admit that a country with shocking human rights record is using their club to clean reputation of their country. They see football as a vehicle to make their behaviour okay and every fan who says “yeah they are bad BUT…” should remember that anything before the but is BS.
Click to expand...
Not would, could. Hell, if Ashley had a change of heart it could have happened under his stewardship. Nothing these new owners have done has been unaffordable to Newcastle United.

Dunno if you've seen my other posts, but most of them include me calling out the owners for being awful.
 






Swansman

Swansman

Pro-peace
May 13, 2019
22,320
Sweden
highflyer said:
I genuinely think that Liverpool supporters have a bit more backbone and a bit more about them than the rollovereasy Geordies.
I would suspect if Qatar goes for this (and they will be warmly welcomed by the Premier league and the Tories of course) they may find a far less warm welcome on merseyside than the saudi murderers did on Tyneside.
Click to expand...
Don't think they'll be jumping around outside Anfield dressed up as Qataris, but if they spend some good money, gets good players in and start to win a lot of games... they would quickly be all happy clappy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SAC


T

The Fish

Exiled Geordie
Jan 5, 2017
382
Stato said:
And have you considered why that, in particular, seems hard?

During the period from 2007/08 to 2021/22 when he was Newcastle's chairman, Newcastle were the tenth highest net spenders in English football, with only the big six, Villa, Everton and West Ham spending more.

We know that you didn't like him. We can't blame you for that. Not many people like him. He wasn't very good at spending his money, but as owners go many, many of us in English football have more than 'he's a useless, seemingly uninterested cockney' to complain about when speaking of our former owners.

Some of us are old enough to remember Newcastle United before John Hall's financial wranglings. When we got promoted to the top tier for the first time it was with a win at St James Park, home of a mid-table tier two team, who spent over half of that decade outside of the top level. There's no disgrace in that. Football is enjoyed at all levels, just not by those obsessed with a belief that they are entitled to something better.
Click to expand...
I don't know where you're getting your figures from but between 07/08 and the summer window of 21/22 (when he was the owner) NUFC net spend is c£161m That puts us about 15th. Below Sunderland and Brighton.
www.transfermarkt.co.uk

Premier League - Transfer income and expenditures

This statistic shows, which clubs of the Premier League in the seasons 07/08 to 20/21 had the highest transfer expenditures and/or transfer incomes.
www.transfermarkt.co.uk www.transfermarkt.co.uk

I've never fully understood this position that I believe you're taking. 'We had it worse, therefore you cannot be unhappy with your lot in life'. Man Utd fans can be unhappy with the mismanagement of their club, so too can Everton, or Sunderland. If only the worst run club could complain, there'd be a lot of silent terraces up and down the country.

I'm not asking for sympathy either, I'm just trying to address some of the misunderstanding or misrepresentations.
 


T

The Fish

Exiled Geordie
Jan 5, 2017
382
Stato said:
No it couldn't. You're not being honest with yourself.
Click to expand...
Of course it could man, Net spend of £200m was manageable under Mike Ashley, let alone another owner/group who were keen to see the club grow. It's just an easy way to hand wave away the 'success'. "Oh it's just because of the money". But it isn't, is it? Howe wasn't a megastar appointment, Burn wasn't a blockbuster signing, Longstaff was already there. Yet, here we are, only lost once in the league, Semi Final of the Cup. And still outspent gross and Nett by a number of clubs.
 




Stato

Stato

Well-known member
Dec 21, 2011
6,607
The Fish said:
I've never fully understood this position that I believe you're taking. 'We had it worse, therefore you cannot be unhappy with your lot in life'.
Click to expand...
Nobody has said that. What we are saying is that, despite how Newcastle fans paint him, Ashley was rubbish at running a football club, he was not the devil. We don't accept the self serving lie that he was worth selling the soul of your football club to be rid of.

If he was Brighton's chairman, I would undoubtedly be miserable, but I'd be a misreable Brighton fan.

If our club was owned by Saudi Arabia, I would be a miserable ex-Brighton fan.
 


Stato

Stato

Well-known member
Dec 21, 2011
6,607
The Fish said:
Of course it could man, Net spend of £200m was manageable under Mike Ashley, let alone another owner/group who were keen to see the club grow. It's just an easy way to hand wave away the 'success'. "Oh it's just because of the money". But it isn't, is it? Howe wasn't a megastar appointment, Burn wasn't a blockbuster signing, Longstaff was already there. Yet, here we are, only lost once in the league, Semi Final of the Cup. And still outspent gross and Nett by a number of clubs.
Click to expand...
Howe came for the money and the opportunity that came with the money. If you won't even admit that, I'm not wasting any more time arguing with you, man. (Who types regional idioms? That's just strange).
 


highflyer

highflyer

Well-known member
Jan 21, 2016
2,435
Swansman said:
Don't think they'll be jumping around outside Anfield dressed up as Qataris, but if they spend some good money, gets good players in and start to win a lot of games... they would quickly be all happy clappy.
Click to expand...
Maybe. Probably.
I'm not naive enough to think that there wouldn't be plenty of fans willing to bask in purchased glory at any club. One or two on here blaming the anti-Saudi sentiment on envy, which tells you how they'd respond to such a takeover, given the chance.
But I still think there would be more organised and sustained resistance from many in Liverpool.
 


B

Berty23

Well-known member
Jun 26, 2012
3,210
FC United of Newcastle would have been brilliant. A one club city where a new club could have been incredible. Kind of like AFC Wimbledon but on an industrial scale. Imagine that.

Far better than selling souls. Which let’s face it they have.

If Brighton has done it I would be off. I watch non-league football anyway. Given Newcastle have not won anything for decades and decades then surely another decade would not hurt as they built a club from the bottom. Sadly it is too easy to just take the quick buck. At least Ashley left the finances in a good state so Newcastle can spend loads and not break FFP.
 




Garry Nelson's Left Foot

Garry Nelson's Left Foot

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
13,150
tokyo
The Fish said:
For the past 14yrs we'd been a billboard for Sports Direct. These owners are vile and the PL, the Government or the FA should have stopped it from happening. But they don't care. And of course, it's the fans who are criticised despite having no say in it. Mind, you're kidding yourself if you think there any many Premier League clubs that are their fans' club. Man City, Arsenal, Leicester, and so on, they're not the local clubs they once were. When Bloom sells you, it won't be to a local Brighton fan will it? That's just the nature of late stage capitalism and a succession of Governments who don't understand football's place in our culture.

It's hard to explain to fans of other clubs how bleak it was under Ashley. Especially to fans of clubs who've really had it bad. Newcastle have never been in the third tier, not been in financial difficulty since the PL was formed, not had threats of administration or winding up orders. So how could we moan? Well, for me it was an existential issue. After decades of supporting us through the good and bad, I found myself not caring. Stay up or go down, who cares? NUFC wouldn't try in the cups, wouldn't try in the league once survival/promotion was guaranteed. Didn't invest in local talent. It was nothing. The rotting corpse of a pigeon hanging in the netting above the stand, wires dangling from the tv brackets in the concourse, windows that hadn't been washed in years. Ashley didn't kill my club, he just put it in a financially induced coma. A zombie club, existing to exist.

I say this to try and give a sense of the desperation on Tyneside. Those scenes you maybe saw outside St James' when the takeover was announced, they would 100% have been replicated had the new owners been from South America, or some faceless multinational hedge fund, or that rarest of breeds, a local boy done good. We didn't want the Saudis in, we wanted Ashley out. The Athletic ran a poll and worded the question like "Are you in favour of the Saudi takeover", overwhelmingly the respondents said yes. Because that was the only horse in town. If the Orleggi group had rocked up with a £300m bid you better believe we would have preferred that one.

Every time we sign someone, any time we succeed, if we ever win something the ownership will be brought up. And it absolutely should. Questions should be asked, but asked of those with the power to make change; the FA, the PL, the Government.
Click to expand...
That's a good post and essentially (but more eloquently)why I said it must be hard as a fan.

I think of it as being a bit like when a parent/grand parent gets dementia or something similar. They're still your parent/grandparent but the person they once were is gone.

I guess that's maybe how you viewed Newcastle under Ashley but I think it's how the rest of the footballing world now see Newcastle. Man City re the prime example. They used to be a proper football club, the scruffy,scrappy neighbour to the global behemoth next door. They are massively successful but they're a bland, soulless, nothingness of a club and that's the fate awaiting Newcastle IMO.

There can be no doubt that Newcastle have been bought to burnish the global image of Saudi Arabia. If religion was the opiate of the people in the 19th century then a good case can be made that sport is the opiate of the masses in the 21st. Saudi Arabia have bought their place in the sporting world in F1, in golf, in boxing and now they have their crown jewel in football.

I have no doubt that they'll do many good things for Newcastle and bring you success beyond your wildest dreams and if, as you say, you felt Newcastle were nothing more than a walking billboard for sports direct then becoming a billboard for a country but actually having something to cheer about on the pitch probably doesn't seem so bad. From the outside looking in though it does look bad when the fans are seen to be so willingly embracing of become a marketing arm of Saudi Arabia. And you're right the F.A and the government and everyone that allowed it to happen are the ones that should be taking the majority of the heat. Sadly they are two organisations that have shown they don't give a flying one about the people they're supposed to be serving/protecting.

As for me and the Albion if Bloom were to sell to a hedge fund/nation state/some other undesirable outcome? I can't honestly say I would walk away. I love the Albion like you love Newcastle, like we love the family member who doesn't recognise us anymore or becomes abusive towards us because of dementia or mental illness. I know there are a lot of people on here who will confidently say they'll walk away but I don't have that confidence. Which goes back to what I said about it being difficult for the fans.
I'll finish by reiterating that I agree the achievements so far on the pitch this season deserve nothing but praise. While you have spent 210m+ in the calendar year no one would bat an eyelid if you were sitting in 12th in the table so to be so far up the table, with a very real chance of making the champions league is incredible. If you finish top four then Eddie Howe deserves all the plaudits and he should be manager of the season(unless De Zerbi gets us in there too...).

Apologies if I've missed out anything key from your post, mine has got longer and longer and taken on a mind of its own.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here