Who is the best owner?

[Monty]

What's wrong with the Man City owners?

They've poured money into the club, but they've also barely put a foot wrong, done lots of work in the local deprived community etc etc.

They're members of a family which, in their own country, throws not only political opponents into jail but also their political opponents' lawyers, routinely employs slave-labour on a mass-scale, is deeply connected to many nasty climate-change denying propeganda organisations in order to protect the oil by which they make the astonishing sums of wealth that remain conspicuously monopolised by the extreme wealthiest in that country and never to help their population, a population squashed under the most strictly-imposed aspects of Sharia while the Mansours live their astonishing playboy lifestyles. They're evil, dictatorial, hypocritical murderers and crooks.

Sorry. I just really hate those people.

Well said Monty. Dreadful horrible people. Last year something like 700 young men died working on construction sites around the Gulf due to diabolical health and safety issues.  Their poor families on the Indian sub-continent had to pay to have their bodies returned home.

And the support for Islamic militant groups now causing great misery in Syria.

Well they're part of the giant proxy Shia-Sunni war going out there, in which we're implicitly on the side of the Sunnis due to our friendliness with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states and the strain in relations with Iran (who are perhaps more famously sponsoring the Assad arseholes in Syria). It's a big fight between bad guys.

[not3bad]

Everton, Swansea and Arsenal spring to mind for well run clubs.

[hilts_coolerking]

They're members of a family which, in their own country, throws not only political opponents into jail but also their political opponents' lawyers, routinely employs slave-labour on a mass-scale, is deeply connected to many nasty climate-change denying propeganda organisations in order to protect the oil by which they make the astonishing sums of wealth that remain conspicuously monopolised by the extreme wealthiest in that country and never to help their population, a population squashed under the most strictly-imposed aspects of Sharia while the Mansours live their astonishing playboy lifestyles. They're evil, dictatorial, hypocritical murderers and crooks.

Until I got to "Sharia" I thought you were on about the United States.

[Monty]

They're members of a family which, in their own country, throws not only political opponents into jail but also their political opponents' lawyers, routinely employs slave-labour on a mass-scale, is deeply connected to many nasty climate-change denying propeganda organisations in order to protect the oil by which they make the astonishing sums of wealth that remain conspicuously monopolised by the extreme wealthiest in that country and never to help their population, a population squashed under the most strictly-imposed aspects of Sharia while the Mansours live their astonishing playboy lifestyles. They're evil, dictatorial, hypocritical murderers and crooks.

Until I got to "Sharia" I thought you were on about the United States.

America's no prize but come on, we don't get anywhere by erasing nuance. The US is deeply guilty of a hell of a lot, but it's not yet as bad as the lives of a subcontinental slave in the UAE. It's a bit of a knife-edge, there are quite prominent people who really do want to make it like that, but let's not be unnuanced here.

[hilts_coolerking]

America's no prize but come on, we don't get anywhere by erasing nuance. The US is deeply guilty of a hell of a lot, but it's not yet as bad as the lives of a subcontinental slave in the UAE. It's a bit of a knife-edge, there are quite prominent people who really do want to make it like that, but let's not be unnuanced here.

I'm simply making the (admittedly rather obvious) point that most, if not all, of that which you condemn the UAE for is currently or has recently been equally applicable to the USA.  And that's without getting into other hobbies such as the exporting of war across the globe and destabilizing democracies they don't like.

[Monty]

Well one thing which pertains very strongly to this debate over the Man City owners is something extremely un-American - nationalisation, namely of oil. The extreme personal wealth of the Mansours is down to their personal monopoly of the major product of the country they run.

As for the other things, well, you do have to distinguish between the government and what the government of the country allows, and what it allows for an immensely complex number of reasons. The United States has an inadequate minimum wage, but that is not the same as the central government repeatedly using brutal slave labour. The United States government is far too tolerant of and cosy with extremely corrupt multi-billionaires who can do whatever they want, but that's not quite the same as those being exactly the same people. Furthermore, the United States has a more than dubious attitude towards its own dissidents, but does not throw people and their lawyers in jail simply for being members of opposition parties, because opposition parties are not banned in the US - in fact, their commitment to freedom of speech is near-fanatical (freedom of speech being distinct from whistleblowing here). They are predominant polluters, and a country which could be said to have founded the climate-sceptic blight on world politics, but it's also the country of California, Oregon, Washington State, states greener than almost any country in Europe. And as for sponsoring and conducting bad wars, of course, they're extremely overfond of the old gun-barrel solutions, but some of their influence has been for the better in the world, overall, and not every American statesman is Henry Kissinger, while the crimes of the UAE and others in stoking the local sectarian wars of Islam are overt government policy aimed at absolutely nothing but the protection of the wealth of one family.

Like I say, the US is not the world's most wonderful country, but by and large I find that the side which says 'it's all the same' on any issue tends to be the side in the wrong.

[hilts_coolerking]

Like I say, the US is not the world's most wonderful country, but by and large I find that the side which says 'it's all the same' on any issue tends to be the side in the wrong.

I'm not saying it's all the same: I'm saying the USA is a much greater blight on the world than the UAE, however despicably the latter treat their migrant workers.  It's quite breathtaking to hear an American offer, apparently without a trace of irony, such criticism of the UAE.

There are so many holes in what you've written there that's it's scarcely believable.  To pick just one: you surely can't be unaware that the US tortures and detains people indefinitely without trial?

[Monty]

Like I say, the US is not the world's most wonderful country, but by and large I find that the side which says 'it's all the same' on any issue tends to be the side in the wrong.

I'm not saying it's all the same: I'm saying the USA is a much greater blight on the world than the UAE, however despicably the latter treat their migrant workers.  It's quite breathtaking to hear an American offer, apparently without a trace of irony, such criticism of the UAE.

There are so many holes in what you've written there that's it's scarcely believable.  To pick just one: you surely can't be unaware that the US tortures and detains people indefinitely without trial?

Yes, but not merely for being an opposition. If you don't wish to see the difference then you don't wish to see the difference, that's fine.

And yes, the US is worse for the world than the UAE in the bad things it does, but it's also better in the good things it does, because it's unbelievably huge and does everything. The UAE is one tiny unambiguously malign place, whereas the US is an enormous superpower which is necessarily going to have large impacts on either side of the moral fence.

Also - not American, other than technically. I have an American passport on my mother's side, but I've lived in Britain my whole life and my mother has since she was eight and doesn't even sound American (and, by the way, all my American family are much more critical of the US than I tend to be, so that attempt to discredit me by nationality wasn't just false, it was false in its premise that Americans are necessarily biased in favour of their country).

Finally, I know you don't care about the migrant workers, but you can't ignore the effects of a country on the people who live in that country. Not all influence is external, and the United States does actually treat its citizens better than the UAE.

[Steve67]

Probably off topic now. I hated Doug Ellis.  He was a complete egomaniac knobsack.  But there is no way he'd have put up with the crap we are currently being served by the present Manager.  I would also like to think that he'd never, ever have appointed Alex wotsitbluenose.

[not3bad]

Probably off topic now. I hated Doug Ellis.

Well that's a shame.  I heard Doug said you are "like a son" to him.

[hilts_coolerking]

Yes, but not merely for being an opposition.

And that makes it acceptable??? 

I'm not trying to discredit you by your nationality, simply pointing out my reaction to what you wrote.  Your bias or otherwise towards your country is entirely your affair but you must accept that criticising another country for stuff that your own country ("technically") also gets up to, when it's not indulging in even worse practices, rings incredibly hollow.

[rob_bridge]

Probably off topic now. I hated Doug Ellis.

Well that's a shame.  I heard Doug said you are "like a son" to him.

We are All Doug's Sons.

[Monty]

Like I say, if you don't see the nuance then you don't see it, that's fine with me. Of course I'm not saying that torture is ever acceptable, I'm merely saying that the reasons for their torturing are different, and less threatening to the world than a regime which tortures for simple opposition. It's a horrible world, but you surely can't be incapable of comprehending that not torturing people for merely formal other political parties is better than doing so, whatever else they get up to.

Also, your continuing to refer to it as my country confirms your familiar 'going for the man not the ball' method is clearly in deployment here. Why must I be bound by policies of a government which I don't agree with? Your generalising of the actions of a government to all of its people, and saying that those people are therefore unable to criticise those of any other country, is insane, and doesn't bode well for any British people (my real country). It could well be asked, following that reasoning, what a Brit is doing criticising the United States for considering the crimes of this country has committed near-constantly for centuries.

[Andy_Lochhead_in_the_air]

Having read through the thread I do not think you can ever be happy. You inevitably finish up with the mega rich who simply buy you silverware, a well meaning fan who cannot financially compete, a crook, a nutter, or an idiot. 

It's time to do away with private ownership of all major football clubs and nationalise the lot of them. I'm convinced `socialist football` is our only hope and salvation of winning trophies again ( or at least receiving an equitable and fair share of each trophy each season).

[hilts_coolerking]

Like I say, if you don't see the nuance then you don't see it, that's fine with me. Of course I'm not saying that torture is ever acceptable, I'm merely saying that the reasons for their torturing are different, and less threatening to the world than a regime which tortures for simple opposition. It's a horrible world, but you surely can't be incapable of comprehending that not torturing people for merely formal other political parties is better than doing so, whatever else they get up to.

Also, your continuing to refer to it as my country confirms your familiar 'going for the man not the ball' method is clearly in deployment here. Why must I be bound by policies of a government which I don't agree with? Your generalising of the actions of a government to all of its people, and saying that those people are therefore unable to criticise those of any other country, is insane, and doesn't bode well for any British people (my real country). It could well be asked, following that reasoning, what a Brit is doing criticising the United States for considering the crimes of this country has committed near-constantly for centuries.

If you don't see the fundamental double standard behind your original post then there's little point in continuing this, because that is the reason for my original reply.  But while we're on the subject of double standards, you're seemingly quite happy to accuse me of "generalising the actions of a government to all of its people" while yourself describing an entire country as "one tiny unambiguously malign place".

You obviously don't know me as well as you like to think because you'd never find me defending the practices of UK governments past or present and you'd definitely never catch me trying to soft-pedal torture and detention without trial as being "less threatening to the world" - whatever the fuck that means.  It's phrases like that which give you away, despite all your protestation.