Do the Sheikh's ethics concern you?

[Strontium]

labour unions are going to be allowed in dubai soon apparantly, is that good enough?

It's a step in the right direction. And for some of us it's only steps like this, and the banning of child jockeys, steps which show that UAE wants to improve itself, that have persuaded us that the Sheikh's investment would be an okay thing after all.

[RedKnight]

Can you be a saint is Islam? Cos if he wants to be a saint then he's gonna have to convert; like a transformer.

 

 

Sheikformer-rich man in disguise.

[RedKnight]

The people who take part in that competition never hit beechers brook.

 

Discuss.

 

Discuss mine first. Jump the fuckin' queue.

[Brownie]

Can you be a saint is Islam? Cos if he wants to be a saint then he's gonna have to convert; like a transformer.

 

 

Sheikformer-rich man in disguise.

 

Sheik-a-tron...

[RedKnight]

Sheik-a-tron...

 

Soundsheikh

Starsheikh

 

Are we assuming that he's a decepticon?

 

Galvasheikh

Sheikhclonus

[Hermes]

Apparently our potential new owner is less than perfect after some journo's decided to make an issue out of the fact that his country bans Israeli's from going to Dubai, that he hires children for work, and that Arabian women in Dubai don't have the freedoms they have in the west.

 

Does anyone really care about any of this, or are you just interested in his money funding our impending domiantion of the world?

 

"Impending domination of the world". It has to be spent wisely. If £45m has taken us from 4th to 5th then £450m could see us getting relegated. :whistle:

[Christianlfc]

muslims have it right! if we done it the same way, we would all be banging virgins and we could choose which one! were the ones missing out? training wives, its fuckin perfect!

[DJLJ]

It does matter to me whether we get someone which is a dictator and treats its citizens badly etc. However it never ceases to amaze me, how people in the west is always right about how to live, what constitutes human rights etc.

A little background. My wife is Chinese, and I have read several reports declaring, Chinese people not being able to move to Hong Kong, visit Hong Kong etc as being against their human rights. Now if people would just step back a second and consider what it would do to a very small piece of land like Hong Kong (Macau is the same, just using HK since it is more known) if 1.3 billion people who has never been allowed to travel outside China, certainly get the opportunity to move to HK, visit HK etc. It is simply not viable, so what China has done is enforce a policy where only people from a certain region is allowed to visit this place this year, next year it is another region, and so forth.

And if we're giong to really talk about violating human rights, I can't move back to Denmark unless I pay 50000 DKK into a state bank account, which I can't touch for 5 years, just because my wife isn't Danish. That to me is a grave breach of human rights.

As for western soldiers going to other countries and imposing our ways of life on them, don't get me started.

[isr]

S-Dog,

 

As far as I'm concerned, you're a detestable cretin of the highest order ("our values are better / they are savages").

 

This isn't the place to continue this, but judging by the pen-picture of yourself you have created this last week, there wouldn't be any point anyway.

 

This is the point where this Internet thingy breaks down for me. In meat space, at this juncture, I would have, ahem, re-educated you. Free of charge. Instead of that, I just get to call you names.

 

Hardly worth it, but better than nothing.

[Paul]

...it'd be interesting to know if the people saying they want the title/success at any price would object to ANYONE with enough money to make it a reality.

 

Murdoch taking over with Kelvin MacKenzie as CEO? If all you want is the title, what's the difference?

 

Very good point (and welcome back).

[isr]

...it'd be interesting to know if the people saying they want the title/success at any price would object to ANYONE with enough money to make it a reality.

 

Murdoch taking over with Kelvin MacKenzie as CEO? If all you want is the title, what's the difference?

 

Very good point (and welcome back).

 

If you're talking in the abstract, then yes, its a good point. And I think that, from the very begining, the answer has been no. After all, isn't that the reason behind this lengthy search for investment in the first place? There are no shortage of people who WANT to invest.

 

Are we lumping the Sheikh in with Murdoch now? I'm not sure what he's done to deserve this (but he's big enough to defend himself).

[Kopite]

I thought he was very Dubai not the county to the East of London? :laugh:

[Dan Vito Corleone]

Soundsheikh

Starsheikh

 

Are we assuming that he's a decepticon?

 

Galvasheikh

Sheikhclonus

 

 

You're forgetting the next phenomenon to hit the Premier League, RedKnight, Sheikhamania....

[Stu Monty]

What they need in Dubai is some good strong leadership from the people who really know about good solid westernised democracy. I reckon if we send over some executives from Nike we'll have this problem with slavery and anti-unionism sorted in a jiffy.

 

Oh....right.

 

I'm not exactly at ease with this investment as I'm not as informed as I'd like to be about the people investing but this tone of everyhting from the west being superior to that in the middle east is leaving a really bitter taste in my mouth.

 

"In the west we treat our people well" Yeah, I know we do, then we go all over the world exploiting other countries populations to sustain that good life.

[Strontium]

S-Dog,

 

As far as I'm concerned, you're a detestable cretin of the highest order ("our values are better / they are savages").

 

This isn't the place to continue this, but judging by the pen-picture of yourself you have created this last week, there wouldn't be any point anyway.

 

This is the point where this Internet thingy breaks down for me. In meat space, at this juncture, I would have, ahem, re-educated you. Free of charge. Instead of that, I just get to call you names.

 

Hardly worth it, but better than nothing.

Fuck off troll. You show yourself completely incapable of arguing the issues, instead resorting to petty name-calling. Everything I've said has been brushed aside with a "so what" or "things are different there" or "Britain isn't perfect either", as if that makes a royal fucking difference.

 

Cunt.

[MLB]

It makes me uncomfortable both as a Liverpool fan and a football fan.

[Brownie]

It makes me uncomfortable both as a Liverpool fan and a football fan.

 

Why though mate? Where is the information that you're so worried about?

 

Don't get me wrong, I have my reservations but as Tom said the other day, I think it's really difficult to judge them until they have had a period of time in control.

[Moschops II]

What they need in Dubai is some good strong leadership from the people who really know about good solid westernised democracy. I reckon if we send over some executives from Nike we'll have this problem with slavery and anti-unionism sorted in a jiffy.

 

Oh....right.

 

I'm not exactly at ease with this investment as I'm not as informed as I'd like to be about the people investing but this tone of everyhting from the west being superior to that in the middle east is leaving a really bitter taste in my mouth.

 

"In the west we treat our people well" Yeah, I know we do, then we go all over the world exploiting other countries populations to sustain that good life.

 

Who thinks "everything from the west is superior to that in the middle east"?

 

I think having the vote and being able to join a union are better than living in the kind of absolute monarchy Britain got rid of in the 17th century, yes.

[MLB]

Why though mate? Where is the information that you're so worried about?

 

Don't get me wrong, I have my reservations but as Tom said the other day, I think it's really difficult to judge them until they have had a period of time in control.

 

 

In business terms the deal looks pretty agreeable for us, but the wealth gap between the bigger and smaller clubs is starting to grow so much that the game is becomin less and less competitive, and less interesting as a result. People are becoming reconciled to the fact that one of four clubs - and more likely one of just two clubs - is going to win the league every year. So we might get some success as a result of all this, but will it be worth anything like as much as it was in the past?

[Moo]

In business terms the deal looks pretty agreeable for us, but the wealth gap between the bigger and smaller clubs is starting to grow so much that the game is becomin less and less competitive, and less interesting as a result. People are becoming reconciled to the fact that one of four clubs - and more likely one of just two clubs - is going to win the league every year. So we might get some success as a result of all this, but will it be worth anything like as much as it was in the past?

 

But then do we, as basically one of the Have Nots, risk being left behind by the Haves?

I am seriously concerned that if we don't take this opportunity then this is how things will pan out.

I am prepared to put what's good for my club above the greater good of the game.

 

If you can't beat 'em join 'em??

[Moschops II]

But then do we, as basically one of the Have Nots, risk being left behind by the Haves?

I am seriously concerned that if we don't take this opportunity then this is how things will pan out.

I am prepared to put what's good for my club above the greater good of the game.

 

If you can't beat 'em join 'em??

 

And when the game loses its appeal to so many people that crowds and TV ratings dwindle, and the likes of Abramovich pull their money out in favour of whatever the next "project" is, and what's left are dozens of clubs with vast debts and not enough income to keep paying them...?

[Cardie]

And when the game loses its appeal to so many people that crowds and TV ratings dwindle, and the likes of Abramovich pull their money out in favour of whatever the next "project" is, and what's left are dozens of clubs with vast debts and not enough income to keep paying them...?

 

They suffer the price of not running a club as well as they should, the same as happens now.

 

If Abramovich pulled out and Chelsea were bankrupt they'd have nobody to blame but themselves.

[Moschops II]

They suffer the price of not running a club as well as they should, the same as happens now.

 

If Abramovich pulled out and Chelsea were bankrupt they'd have nobody to blame but themselves.

 

But what happens when every club (or every major club, anyway) is run by an Abramovich, or a Glazer... or a Maktoum?

[Cardie]

But what happens when every club (or every major club, anyway) is run by an Abramovich, or a Glazer... or a Maktoum?

 

It depends on how they are run.

 

If they are run like Chelsea with huge losses then each of those clubs dissapear or have to cut right back and re-build. If they are sensible and remain self sufficent then they can continue.

[Moo]

And when the game loses its appeal to so many people that crowds and TV ratings dwindle, and the likes of Abramovich pull their money out in favour of whatever the next "project" is, and what's left are dozens of clubs with vast debts and not enough income to keep paying them...?

 

And if this doesn't happen?

LFC could well be wishing we'd have taken our chance when we had it.

 

I actually think that now Abramovich is involved in football then the only way to keep the game competetive is for other clubs to go down a similar, more classy and moralistic of course, route.

 

It's not cheating or buying success (if indeed success comes), it's levelling the playing field.