Sheikh Mansour.

J

John Deary me

Well-known member
In my opinion all that is wrong with football, attending only his second match in 15 years of ownership of City.
I know Sadler has come in for some criticism from a few on here ( me included) but a genuine fan of football and his club.
I did want City to win for the country but after reading that I've come to the conclusion we are in a good place , yes money buys you a treble and the best players but city's fans were lifeless until they scored , the emptythiad is similar on most games.
And before anyone states i wouldnt be saying that if they bought blackpool, i most certainly would, In a nutshell we've got a real club with real fans, shove the dirty oil money !!!
 
subject is being discussed on the CL thread yet you feel the need to start a new thread. And using the term "emptythiad" more than suggests a liking for another team.

Here's a thought. Why don't we kick all these sheikh owned race horses out of the country. Sheikhs rarely attend. Sheiks buying all the top rated horses and have been doing it for years. And to suggest City don't have real fans is an insult.
 
LeedsSeasider said:
Definitely a plastic united fan in
Click to expand...

20togo said:
subject is being discussed on the CL thread yet you feel the need to start a new thread. And using the term "emptythiad" more than suggests a liking for another team.

Here's a thought. Why don't we kick all these sheikh owned race horses out of the country. Sheikhs rarely attend. Sheiks buying all the top rated horses and have been doing it for years. And to suggest City don't have real fans is an insult.
Click to expand...
I don't have to read every thread just to suit you pal. A group of my mates went last night real city fans as well, they were at Maine Rd when they have been struggling. Thing is they are first to admit that it's a lifeless stadium.
As for the rant about the horses and me supporting another club ... crack on mate .
 
John Deary me said:
I don't have to read every thread just to suit you pal. A group of my mates went last night real city fans as well, they were at Maine Rd when they have been struggling. Thing is they are first to admit that it's a lifeless stadium.
As for the rant about the horses and me supporting another club ... crack on mate .
Click to expand...
So you just wanted the attention of making a point on your own thread. Ok then. And call it a rant about horses if you want but the point is just the same. Sheikh owner of many horses using "dirty oil money" and rarely attending. Suggests to me that not only are you very bitter about Citys success and you love to be hypocritical with your double standards.
 
The o/p makes a fair point about the Sheikh; second game in 15 years makes him a (wealthy) glory hunting plastic to me!

I also felt the Citeh fans were rather muted until they scored, compared to their Milanese counterparts.

All irrelevant now; they have secured the treble and got the CL monkey off their back. Money well spent! 😉
 
John Deary me said:
In my opinion all that is wrong with football, attending only his second match in 15 years of ownership of City.
I know Sadler has come in for some criticism from a few on here ( me included) but a genuine fan of football and his club.
I did want City to win for the country but after reading that I've come to the conclusion we are in a good place , yes money buys you a treble and the best players but city's fans were lifeless until they scored , the emptythiad is similar on most games.
And before anyone states i wouldnt be saying that if they bought blackpool, i most certainly would, In a nutshell we've got a real club with real fans, shove the dirty oil money !!!
Click to expand...
Oh do shut up. How unbelievably boring and agenda filled. Yawn yawn yawn The City fans were absolutely brilliant. I know because I was there. It was an amazing night currently in Istanbul nursing a fabulous hangover !!!!Historic night which won’t be ruined by jealous whoppers like you. I’m delighted for them personally.
 
PNENIL said:
Also sponsored by Wonga and other betting companies.
I could understand the jealousy of City if we were an Aston Villa or even a Spurs. But we operate in a totally different world and whatever City do is never going to effect us.
Click to expand...
All fair points, it's not jealousy on my part , more of a living in the bread and butter football world .
 
BlackpoolFC said:
Oh do shut up. How unbelievably boring and agenda filled. Yawn yawn yawn The City fans were absolutely brilliant. I know because I was there. It was an amazing night currently in Istanbul nursing a fabulous hangover !!!!Historic night which won’t be ruined by jealous whoppers like you. I’m delighted for them personally.
Click to expand...
Glory hunter. Hope its a bad hangover.
 
BlackpoolFC said:
Oh do shut up. How unbelievably boring and agenda filled. Yawn yawn yawn The City fans were absolutely brilliant. I know because I was there. It was an amazing night currently in Istanbul nursing a fabulous hangover !!!!Historic night which won’t be ruined by jealous whoppers like you. I’m delighted for them personally.
Click to expand...
Have to say though, the Inter fans came across far far louder than City fans on the tv.
 
If I was worth billions upon billions and had businesses, investments and responsibilities all over the globe I imagine I too would probably struggle to get to Bloomfield Road all that often ! These sheiks obviously don’t have the same relationship with their clubs as fans - going to a football match isn’t probably that exciting when you can literally do anything - it would be odd if they did tbh. I don’t think the Man City owner deserves any criticism. He’s put the money in place, transformed the club - AND the local community (compare the area around the stadium now to 25 years ago) - and they’ve not exactly bought success - they spend just as much as other big teams - in fact their financial model is probably a damn site more efficient than Chelsea’s is. As far as I can see City’s finances aren’t based on building up huge amounts of debt either - in fact until recently there was no debt until they took out a loan to pay for infrastructure developments across the ‘city group’. Compare to say Liverpool, United or Spurs -huge debts and relatively little success - and their squads and academies look a million miles away from Man City in terms of bringing about future success and producing income down the line.
As for the ethics of their wealth - yes oils not a great thing for the planet and the Middle East isn’t a great place for a lot of people but that doesn’t make it any more sketchy than money made through questionable banking activities (VB), dodgy business contracts (Piley), Gambling (Stoke, Brighton, Brentford etc) or any big successful business really as there’s ethical issues in all of them.

Man City and their owners should only be judged on the long term security of the club. Is there chance of it going out of business ? No. Are they facing a financial catastrophe. No. Are they operating unethically. No. Are they benefitting their and the wider community? Yes.

Go through a few clubs and those answers aren’t the same.

The issue is - people are generally jealous of others success. That’s the only reason City are getting criticism.
 
There are times when I wish we had “a fairy God mother” owner. The ground was brilliant, we bought the best of players and we won every week. Off in to Europe etc.
Aah, but how much could I afford? Arguments with the missus: “you buggering off again?” Maybe having to pay out for the family too? Ok if you’re rich. But, your mates can’t afford it.
A pipe dream. I’ll stick with what we’ve got.
 
LA1 Seasider said:
If I was worth billions upon billions and had businesses, investments and responsibilities all over the globe I imagine I too would probably struggle to get to Bloomfield Road all that often ! These sheiks obviously don’t have the same relationship with their clubs as fans - going to a football match isn’t probably that exciting when you can literally do anything - it would be odd if they did tbh. I don’t think the Man City owner deserves any criticism. He’s put the money in place, transformed the club - AND the local community (compare the area around the stadium now to 25 years ago) - and they’ve not exactly bought success - they spend just as much as other big teams - in fact their financial model is probably a damn site more efficient than Chelsea’s is. As far as I can see City’s finances aren’t based on building up huge amounts of debt either - in fact until recently there was no debt until they took out a loan to pay for infrastructure developments across the ‘city group’. Compare to say Liverpool, United or Spurs -huge debts and relatively little success - and their squads and academies look a million miles away from Man City in terms of bringing about future success and producing income down the line.
As for the ethics of their wealth - yes oils not a great thing for the planet and the Middle East isn’t a great place for a lot of people but that doesn’t make it any more sketchy than money made through questionable banking activities (VB), dodgy business contracts (Piley), Gambling (Stoke, Brighton, Brentford etc) or any big successful business really as there’s ethical issues in all of them.

Man City and their owners should only be judged on the long term security of the club. Is there chance of it going out of business ? No. Are they facing a financial catastrophe. No. Are they operating unethically. No. Are they benefitting their and the wider community? Yes.

Go through a few clubs and those answers aren’t the same.

The issue is - people are generally jealous of others success. That’s the only reason City are getting criticism.
Click to expand...
Some fair points, the 115 charges from the Premier league may not quite do them any favours mind.
 
Let's be honest since the minimum wage was abolished it has mostly been the clubs with the most money that ends up winning. The game and especially the premier league has become global tv viewing. So rich owners and especially those that live thousands of miles away can view from the comfort of their homes without travel.

Football has historically been the plaything of the local businessman done well, but that hasn't gone historically well for us with Cartmell, and Oyston until we had foreign investment from Belekon. I am happy with Sadler, and hopefully, if we can progress back to the championship and beyond he may bring on board some big investors from Asia. We may one day progress to playing in Europe.
 
It appears to me that the only reason all these multl billionaire sheikhs are in it is because they can.
They art not really interested in football, they just want power.
They couldn't care less about the fans, the results, or the players.
They just want to own things and people.

Anyone know a Sheikhs who wants to take over a 'lower League team? 😉
 
I could hear the citeh fans clearly on my TV. I think you’ve got to remember it would be incredibly tense inside the stadium.

Is it true that it’s only the Sheikh’s second live game? I feel like I recognise him and have seen him in the stands before and I don’t follow City closely.
 
LA1 Seasider said:
If I was worth billions upon billions and had businesses, investments and responsibilities all over the globe I imagine I too would probably struggle to get to Bloomfield Road all that often ! These sheiks obviously don’t have the same relationship with their clubs as fans - going to a football match isn’t probably that exciting when you can literally do anything - it would be odd if they did tbh. I don’t think the Man City owner deserves any criticism. He’s put the money in place, transformed the club - AND the local community (compare the area around the stadium now to 25 years ago) - and they’ve not exactly bought success - they spend just as much as other big teams - in fact their financial model is probably a damn site more efficient than Chelsea’s is. As far as I can see City’s finances aren’t based on building up huge amounts of debt either - in fact until recently there was no debt until they took out a loan to pay for infrastructure developments across the ‘city group’. Compare to say Liverpool, United or Spurs -huge debts and relatively little success - and their squads and academies look a million miles away from Man City in terms of bringing about future success and producing income down the line.
As for the ethics of their wealth - yes oils not a great thing for the planet and the Middle East isn’t a great place for a lot of people but that doesn’t make it any more sketchy than money made through questionable banking activities (VB), dodgy business contracts (Piley), Gambling (Stoke, Brighton, Brentford etc) or any big successful business really as there’s ethical issues in all of them.

Man City and their owners should only be judged on the long term security of the club. Is there chance of it going out of business ? No. Are they facing a financial catastrophe. No. Are they operating unethically. No. Are they benefitting their and the wider community? Yes.

Go through a few clubs and those answers aren’t the same.

The issue is - people are generally jealous of others success. That’s the only reason City are getting criticism.
Click to expand...
Yep bang on

Jealousy and Xenophobia
 
LA1 Seasider said:
If I was worth billions upon billions and had businesses, investments and responsibilities all over the globe I imagine I too would probably struggle to get to Bloomfield Road all that often ! These sheiks obviously don’t have the same relationship with their clubs as fans - going to a football match isn’t probably that exciting when you can literally do anything - it would be odd if they did tbh. I don’t think the Man City owner deserves any criticism. He’s put the money in place, transformed the club - AND the local community (compare the area around the stadium now to 25 years ago) - and they’ve not exactly bought success - they spend just as much as other big teams - in fact their financial model is probably a damn site more efficient than Chelsea’s is. As far as I can see City’s finances aren’t based on building up huge amounts of debt either - in fact until recently there was no debt until they took out a loan to pay for infrastructure developments across the ‘city group’. Compare to say Liverpool, United or Spurs -huge debts and relatively little success - and their squads and academies look a million miles away from Man City in terms of bringing about future success and producing income down the line.
As for the ethics of their wealth - yes oils not a great thing for the planet and the Middle East isn’t a great place for a lot of people but that doesn’t make it any more sketchy than money made through questionable banking activities (VB), dodgy business contracts (Piley), Gambling (Stoke, Brighton, Brentford etc) or any big successful business really as there’s ethical issues in all of them.

Man City and their owners should only be judged on the long term security of the club. Is there chance of it going out of business ? No. Are they facing a financial catastrophe. No. Are they operating unethically. No. Are they benefitting their and the wider community? Yes.

Go through a few clubs and those answers aren’t the same.

The issue is - people are generally jealous of others success. That’s the only reason City are getting criticism.
Click to expand...
100 per cent correct
 
LA1 Seasider said:
I don’t think the Man City owner deserves any criticism. He’s put the money in place, transformed the club - AND the local community (compare the area around the stadium now to 25 years ago)
Click to expand...

We have to be very careful when it comes to contextualising the rulers of States purely in terms of their football dealings. Why has Mansour put millions into building up the football power of Manchester City? Was it a whim? Was he a long term fan of the club? No, it was neither of these things. To understand the core reason for his actions, look to the man he installed as the Chairman of the Club - Khaldoon al-Mubarak.
Mubarak works for Sheikh Mohammed and, as a member of the Abu Dhabi Government he was chairman of the Executive Affairs Authority, a strategic government body responsible for advising on Abu Dhabi's international image. He was deputed from his duties for Sheikh Mohammed to run City shortly after Mansour bought the club, to shape a more dignified direction after the initial frenzy of media coverage which was all about money and considered detrimental by the Abu Dhabi establishment. So, therein lies the essence of the project: sportswashing the image of Abu Dhabi, it's royal family and the wider UAE. Right now Manchester City has unquestionably become the most prominent global projection of Abu Dhabi itself, sponsored by four state-owned companies: the airline Etihad, the telecommunications company Etisalat, the investment company Aabar and the Abu Dhabi Tourism Authority. The TV coverage this brings with it includes the rolling adverts respendently displayed around the perimeter of the stands imploring the viewers around the world to "Visit Abu Dhabi, Travellers Welcome."
LA1 Seasider said:
As for the ethics of their wealth - yes oils not a great thing for the planet and the Middle East isn’t a great place for a lot of people but that doesn’t make it any more sketchy than money made through questionable banking activities (VB), dodgy business contracts (Piley), Gambling (Stoke, Brighton, Brentford etc) or any big successful business really as there’s ethical issues in all of them.
Click to expand...

When discussing the ethics of football club owners it is not just their business ethics that warrant our attention. As a member of the Abu Dhabi ruling family Mansour also has to be judged on the way that the House of Nahyan exercises its power over its citizens. Abu Dhabi is not a free and democratic State. Its critics are routinely imprisoned without access to a fair trial, imprisoned critics of the State are also tortured; immigrant workers are expelled for going on strike to highlight the appalling pay and conditions they work in and protests are closed down.

Yes, wealth was widely distributed among the Abu Dhabi citizens by the late Sheikh Zayed. He was widely revered as a visionary, planning Abu Dhabi's super-fast development after the oil riches transformed the country from the 1960s, while retaining traditional Sunni Muslim values. This is the other side of the coin that has also seen City's owners redevelop the area around the Etihad. They understand - unlike other clubs' corporate owners - that the lifeblood of a football club, (in Europe and South America at least), is its community of supporters. Nevertheless, in this meeting, of a desperate UK economy with Abu Dhabi's fortunes, there is a limit to the UK government's disapproval over allegations of torture and flaws in the UAE legal system.

My point here is to emphasise the need for care in debating the virtues or otherwise of Man City's owners. It is not simply a matter of turning a blind eye because, "well, all these owners are the same, aren't they?"....because, they're not.
 
Last edited:
All totally irrelevant for now, as far as I'm concerned, we won't be playing them until the 25/26 season after our back-to-back playoff successes
 
Last edited:
LA1 Seasider said:
If I was worth billions upon billions and had businesses, investments and responsibilities all over the globe I imagine I too would probably struggle to get to Bloomfield Road all that often ! These sheiks obviously don’t have the same relationship with their clubs as fans - going to a football match isn’t probably that exciting when you can literally do anything - it would be odd if they did tbh. I don’t think the Man City owner deserves any criticism. He’s put the money in place, transformed the club - AND the local community (compare the area around the stadium now to 25 years ago) - and they’ve not exactly bought success - they spend just as much as other big teams - in fact their financial model is probably a damn site more efficient than Chelsea’s is. As far as I can see City’s finances aren’t based on building up huge amounts of debt either - in fact until recently there was no debt until they took out a loan to pay for infrastructure developments across the ‘city group’. Compare to say Liverpool, United or Spurs -huge debts and relatively little success - and their squads and academies look a million miles away from Man City in terms of bringing about future success and producing income down the line.
As for the ethics of their wealth - yes oils not a great thing for the planet and the Middle East isn’t a great place for a lot of people but that doesn’t make it any more sketchy than money made through questionable banking activities (VB), dodgy business contracts (Piley), Gambling (Stoke, Brighton, Brentford etc) or any big successful business really as there’s ethical issues in all of them.

Man City and their owners should only be judged on the long term security of the club. Is there chance of it going out of business ? No. Are they facing a financial catastrophe. No. Are they operating unethically. No. Are they benefitting their and the wider community? Yes.

Go through a few clubs and those answers aren’t the same.

The issue is - people are generally jealous of others success. That’s the only reason City are getting criticism.
Click to expand...
Excellent post especially about the transformation of the area around the stadium and beyond.
One thing for certain they aren’t the Glaziers and a lot of other owners when it comes to reasons for running a football club.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
We have to be very careful when it comes to contextualising the rulers of States purely in terms of their football dealings. Why has Mansour put millions into building up the football power of Manchester City? Was it a whim? Was he a long term fan of the club? No, it was neither of these things. To understand the core reason for his actions, look to the man he installed as the Chairman of the Club - Khaldoon al-Mubarak.
Mubarak works for Sheikh Mohammed and, as a member of the Abu Dhabi Government he was chairman of the Executive Affairs Authority, a strategic government body responsible for advising on Abu Dhabi's international image. He was deputed from his duties for Sheikh Mohammed to run City shortly after Mansour bought the club, to shape a more dignified direction after the initial frenzy of media coverage which was all about money and considered detrimental by the Abu Dhabi establishment. So, therein lies the essence of the project: sportswashing the image of Abu Dhabi, it's royal family and the wider UAE. Right now Manchester City has unquestionably become the most prominent global projection of Abu Dhabi itself, sponsored by four state-owned companies: the airline Etihad, the telecommunications company Etisalat, the investment company Aabar and the Abu Dhabi Tourism Authority. The TV coverage this brings with it includes the rolling adverts respendently displayed around the perimeter of the stands imploring the viewers around the world to "Visit Abu Dhabi, Travellers Welcome."


When discussing the ethics of football club owners it is not just their business ethics that warrant our attention. As a member of the Abu Dhabi ruling family Mansour also has to be judged on the way that the House of Nahyan exercises its power over its citizens. Abu Dhabi is not a free and democratic State. Its critics are routinely imprisoned without access to a fair trial, imprisoned critics of the State are also tortured; immigrant workers are expelled for going on strike to highlight the appalling pay and conditions they work in and protests are closed down.

Yes, wealth was widely distributed among the Abu Dhabi citizens by the late Sheikh Zayed. He was widely revered as a visionary, planning Abu Dhabi's super-fast development after the oil riches transformed the country from the 1960s, while retaining traditional Sunni Muslim values. This is the other side of the coin that has also seen City's owners redevelop the area around the Etihad. They understand - unlike other clubs' corporate owners - that the lifeblood of a football club, (in Europe and South America at least), is its community of supporters. Nevertheless, in this meeting, of a desperate UK economy with Abu Dhabi's fortunes, there is a limit to the UK government's disapproval over allegations of torture and flaws in the UAE legal system.

My point here is to emphasise the need for care in debating the virtues or otherwise of Man City's owners. It is not simply a matter of turning a blind eye because, "well, are these owners are the same, aren't they?"....because, they're not.
Click to expand...
To be honest your point just looks like a copy and paste job
 
bleach51 said:
Excellent post especially about the transformation of the area around the stadium and beyond.
One thing for certain they aren’t the Glaziers and a lot of other owners when it comes to reasons for running a football club.
Click to expand...
No they aren't the Glazers, who appear to own a football club to make as much money as they can. Same could be said about FSG at Liverpool.
Maybe various Arab states want to own football clubs to justify their own despicable regimes and human rights records
Possibly the same reason they've muscled in on boxing and F1.
I think on balance I'd prefer owners who want to make money over owners who behead journalists
 
1966_and_all_that said:
We have to be very careful when it comes to contextualising the rulers of States purely in terms of their football dealings. Why has Mansour put millions into building up the football power of Manchester City? Was it a whim? Was he a long term fan of the club? No, it was neither of these things. To understand the core reason for his actions, look to the man he installed as the Chairman of the Club - Khaldoon al-Mubarak.
Mubarak works for Sheikh Mohammed and, as a member of the Abu Dhabi Government he was chairman of the Executive Affairs Authority, a strategic government body responsible for advising on Abu Dhabi's international image. He was deputed from his duties for Sheikh Mohammed to run City shortly after Mansour bought the club, to shape a more dignified direction after the initial frenzy of media coverage which was all about money and considered detrimental by the Abu Dhabi establishment. So, therein lies the essence of the project: sportswashing the image of Abu Dhabi, it's royal family and the wider UAE. Right now Manchester City has unquestionably become the most prominent global projection of Abu Dhabi itself, sponsored by four state-owned companies: the airline Etihad, the telecommunications company Etisalat, the investment company Aabar and the Abu Dhabi Tourism Authority. The TV coverage this brings with it includes the rolling adverts respendently displayed around the perimeter of the stands imploring the viewers around the world to "Visit Abu Dhabi, Travellers Welcome."


When discussing the ethics of football club owners it is not just their business ethics that warrant our attention. As a member of the Abu Dhabi ruling family Mansour also has to be judged on the way that the House of Nahyan exercises its power over its citizens. Abu Dhabi is not a free and democratic State. Its critics are routinely imprisoned without access to a fair trial, imprisoned critics of the State are also tortured; immigrant workers are expelled for going on strike to highlight the appalling pay and conditions they work in and protests are closed down.

Yes, wealth was widely distributed among the Abu Dhabi citizens by the late Sheikh Zayed. He was widely revered as a visionary, planning Abu Dhabi's super-fast development after the oil riches transformed the country from the 1960s, while retaining traditional Sunni Muslim values. This is the other side of the coin that has also seen City's owners redevelop the area around the Etihad. They understand - unlike other clubs' corporate owners - that the lifeblood of a football club, (in Europe and South America at least), is its community of supporters. Nevertheless, in this meeting, of a desperate UK economy with Abu Dhabi's fortunes, there is a limit to the UK government's disapproval over allegations of torture and flaws in the UAE legal system.

My point here is to emphasise the need for care in debating the virtues or otherwise of Man City's owners. It is not simply a matter of turning a blind eye because, "well, are these owners are the same, aren't they?"....because, they're not.
Click to expand...
Interesting and detailed post but it is motivated by sports-washing rather than benevolence towards the good people of East Manchester ….

I know a few old school City fans that only go away and haven’t attended the Etiihad …
 
LA1 Seasider said:
If I was worth billions upon billions and had businesses, investments and responsibilities all over the globe I imagine I too would probably struggle to get to Bloomfield Road all that often ! These sheiks obviously don’t have the same relationship with their clubs as fans - going to a football match isn’t probably that exciting when you can literally do anything - it would be odd if they did tbh. I don’t think the Man City owner deserves any criticism. He’s put the money in place, transformed the club - AND the local community (compare the area around the stadium now to 25 years ago) - and they’ve not exactly bought success - they spend just as much as other big teams - in fact their financial model is probably a damn site more efficient than Chelsea’s is. As far as I can see City’s finances aren’t based on building up huge amounts of debt either - in fact until recently there was no debt until they took out a loan to pay for infrastructure developments across the ‘city group’. Compare to say Liverpool, United or Spurs -huge debts and relatively little success - and their squads and academies look a million miles away from Man City in terms of bringing about future success and producing income down the line.
As for the ethics of their wealth - yes oils not a great thing for the planet and the Middle East isn’t a great place for a lot of people but that doesn’t make it any more sketchy than money made through questionable banking activities (VB), dodgy business contracts (Piley), Gambling (Stoke, Brighton, Brentford etc) or any big successful business really as there’s ethical issues in all of them.

Man City and their owners should only be judged on the long term security of the club. Is there chance of it going out of business ? No. Are they facing a financial catastrophe. No. Are they operating unethically. No. Are they benefitting their and the wider community? Yes.

Go through a few clubs and those answers aren’t the same.

The issue is - people are generally jealous of others success. That’s the only reason City are getting criticism.
Click to expand...
We can't criticise the Arab nation when we buy Chinese goods from a communist regime who's human rights are questionable.
 
Blackpool_Rox said:
Interesting and detailed post but it is motivated by sports-washing rather than benevolence towards the good people of East Manchester ….

I know a few old school City fans that only go away and haven’t attended the Etiihad …
Click to expand...
I see your point but the motivation for posting was to be informative about Mansour's key intentions whilst recognising the family's legitimate , and contrasting, benevolence.
 
RUSTY_2_STANDS said:
No they aren't the Glazers, who appear to own a football club to make as much money as they can. Same could be said about FSG at Liverpool.
Maybe various Arab states want to own football clubs to justify their own despicable regimes and human rights records
Possibly the same reason they've muscled in on boxing and F1.
I think on balance I'd prefer owners who want to make money over owners who behead journalists
Click to expand...
But as I said, not all Middle Eastern States are the same. The Saudis are way ahead in that sense over the others, with a medieval outlook.

You can't treat them all as one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top