#Barclays 23/24

[D Angelo Barksdale]

Which former poster is this again ?

I can never keep up.

[captainkev]

19 minutes ago, Herc said:

Which former poster is this again ?

Supras isn't it?

[Mr. Brightside]

2 hours ago, Herc said:

Which former poster is this again ?

I can never keep up.

Who else could write so much and say so little?

[DoingThe42]

9 hours ago, Satoshi said:

An argument regarding what?

It's to prompt you to think - why has no player who ever signed for a Russian club been criticised for the treatment of homosexuals in that country, but it is wheeled out every time a player signs for a Saudi club? Even if, by any measure, their treatment is far worse in parts of Russia.

Or secondly, why wasn't there some critical monologue of Russia before the 2018 world cup but there was before 2022 in Qatar? Lineker himself admitted the BBC got this badly wrong.

The media narrative of the Middle East is patronising, hypocritical, racist and deeply out of date. That's the point.

Importing pets can be a challenge but you can easily buy pets (including dogs) there and they are perfectly legal.

Additionally, the state can kill anyone they want really (and does), but Jamal Khashoggi was a botched kidnapping rather than an assassination. Still not great, but the UK and the US have been running targeted assassinations through drones in the Middle East for decades. And as for kidnapping people and transferring them to a prison out of country? Yeah, wonder where they got that idea from...

Finally, nobody had issues with Russian owners / players signing for Russian teams even though the Russian state were quite openly killing people in the UK.

Some people hate the idea that the Muslims / Arabs bad mentality is actually being questioned.

Much easier to live in ignorance. I get it.

 

 

This is an example of the damage shite like Twitter has done to discussion in our society. People who want to defend the indefensible only have to play the whataboutery card.

This is a piss-poor defence of a dreadful part of the world. You want to feel ok about (at least defending others, but I'm assuming you also did yourself) making money living in a place that built its ability to offer you wealth on slavery and the utter misery of the people who existed to serve you. And to do that, you try to argue that there's no moral black hole in that because other places aren't perfect either. I understand where the need for the moral and mental gymnastics comes from, but it's just not a credible point to make.

You basically took a bribe (assuming you took the ME $$$, you haven't said where) to put moral considerations to one side. I don't know your financial circumstances or why you did it, but that's what you did. These footballers are doing the same. They have no need to do so and I am happy to call them dicks for doing so.

I was offered the bribe. I'm fucking skint, but I said no. I remain fucking skint, but I still wouldn't change my answer.

I have absolutely no doubt that if you respond it'll be with another "But what about". If you like.

Edited July 24, 2023 by DoingThe42

[DoingThe42]

11 hours ago, itzdrk said:

It is odd that players moving to Saudi have turned their back on LGBT+ people but nobody signing in England has turned their back on refugees.  

Not really. While UK policy towards refugees is poor, the UK doesn't criminalise being a refugee. It took in over 16,000 in 2022.

We may agree that the UK's policy is very bad, but it's not comparable with cutting up journalists (and not even really trying to seriously deny it), while having a society structured on medieval grounds denying a lot of people basic rights.

There are no perfect countries. But there are some that are much worse than others.

[itzdrk]

40 minutes ago, DoingThe42 said:

Not really. While UK policy towards refugees is poor, the UK doesn't criminalise being a refugee. It took in over 16,000 in 2022.

We may agree that the UK's policy is very bad, but it's not comparable with cutting up journalists (and not even really trying to seriously deny it), while having a society structured on medieval grounds denying a lot of people basic rights.

There are no perfect countries. But there are some that are much worse than others.

It's no a competition.  Both are scum countries. 

[ClydeTon]

There is a TL:DR Summary at the bottom of this post. 

I'm very torn as to whether to actually make this post or not as it's a topic where you have to tread very carefully, particularly because of how polarised it is. So I'll try to be as objective and critical here.

The players going to Saudi, first and foremost, have every right to. It's no different, on paper, to signing for Celtic, or La Galaxy, or Zenit, or Sydney FC - whoever. At it's fundamentals that's all it is. It's a choice of employment (chosen by the money on offer) and that's all the players will be thinking about.

Is it greedy of them? Absolutely. Saudi Arabia has a really troubling (that might be a soft term for it) human rights record and to actively participate in what is the biggest move of their sportswashing campaign yet raised questions over their characters. Henderson, an outspoken ally of the LGBT+ community, moving to Saudi Arabia, a country which has chosen to remain deeply religious at an institutional level, rejecting the idea of a secular state - and as part of this has not accepted "modern" values such as individualism - which LGBT+, in it's modern form, is a product of. Homosexuality is a natural occurrence however the current LGBT ideals of personal expression (ie Pride), revising gender, etc. are a modern occurrence. Saudi Arabia is, compared to the west, behind in that social curve - or perhaps on a different path altogether, who knows.

Point here is- Players moving to Saudi Arabia are driven by money, there is no denying that. Anyone who does is in some sort of dreamland. However, it is their right to go to Saudi Arabia if they so choose and, really, that's the bottom line. We can have the discussions around it but the players going there makes no difference to the Saudi Record.

From an alternative way of looking at it, you could argue these players going to Saudi Arabia, or the Qatar World Cup, have actually brought the West's attention to the Human Rights abuses of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc. We don't talk about them much otherwise, certainly not in the mainstream. We should, so in a sense these players have accidentally helped the conversation reach the forefront.

Would these players not going to Arabia change anything? No.  Pretty much everyone sees through Middle Eastern sportswashing, because of conversations like this one. Anyone who doesn't uses stupid excuses to draw the blame away, however they are, really, fully aware of it.

Saying as the common arguement defending Arabia is simply whataboutery, let's look at it. Satoshi referenced Russia;

Russia's most noteworthy action of the 21st century has been, obviously, the Ukraine invasion. They were punished as hard as the west could punish them without (direct) armed conflict.

Russian Football is limited to, well, Russia, with their national and club teams bring suspended from UEFA and FIFA Competitions. They don't compete under the Russian flag at the Olympics, most other sports have similar arrangements. Russia was economically sanctioned with virtually all American and European companies withdrawing from the state - although they did virtually nothing in doing so, but that's a different discussion.

Even though it took the Ukraine War for it to go this far, Russia has been punished as much as possible for their actions.

Saudi Arabia is on an international par with, say, France. Their sports teams compete under their banner, in Continental and International Tournaments. They have no sanctions against them whatsoever and have very deep trading connections to the west - the US in particular - relating to things such as arms and oil.

They do what they want, when they want.

Russia can't. Russia has been backed into their corner (a possible mistake, as the Russians usually come back out with force) and are left with few options.

 

In my own opinion- there's nothing wrong with a player plying their trade in Saudi Arabia. The Human Rights abuses and such aren't their (the players') fault and they don't worsen them. As I remarked above, they actually bring more light to it- although that's a reflection of our society only caring when we feel like it.

Yes, there is absolutely a morally unacceptable situation in Saudi Arabia, and there has been pretty much forever. But these players don't make it any worse. If they want to be greedy c**ts, they can be greedy c**ts.

Although, in the case of players like Jack Hendry, he's getting the chance to play with/against, some of football's (formerly?) best players, and that's a really valuable experience for a player like him. The others are just going there to make as much money as they can before they retire from playing.

TL:DR

Saudi Arabia has a massive human rights problem, yes- no question about it. It's really scum, same as Russia.

Is that the fault of these players? No. If you think about it, they bring more attention to it, inadvertently.

Are the players Greedy C**ts? Oh yes, absolutely. But it's their choice if they want to be greedy c**ts.

Whataboutery is pointless. Russia has been heavily punished. Britain's refugee situation, however bad, is quite soft compared to Saudi Arabia's Human Rights record. Regardless, just because other countries do bad stuff doesn't mean the Saudis get away for free.

Again, trying to see both sides of the arguement and keeping my opinions to the side.

[Bairnardo]

Fucking hell the Saudi machine is really spinning up now.... Kylian Mbappe for 259 million

 

Looking forward to Gary Nevilles take on this. 

[ClydeTon]

€300m... F**king hell.

Neymar and Mbappe's moves to PSG were a combined €400m...

[Mr. Brightside]

300 mill for one year as well, seemingly.

[Musketeer Gripweed]

Immediately loaned out to Newcastle probably. Abu Dhabi are going to get bored sportswashing in Manchester soon I reckon.

The game's fucked.

[Jives Miguel]

I really hope he signs for them. The chaos and meltdowns it will cause will be superb.

[Guest]

I hope Mbappe goes. It'll be elite football falling on its sword. Might become a tipping point that causes people to rethink.

Edit: Actually, no it won't, because your average fan of elite football hasn't the slightest curiosity in how politics or economics affects the industry they're a consumer of or the wider world.

Edited July 24, 2023 by FreedomFarter

[Derry Alli]

12 minutes ago, Jives Miguel said:

I really hope he signs for them. The chaos and meltdowns it will cause will be superb.

I'm not sure it will

 He's forced PSG's hand in a dead market, after scooping a €40m loyalty bonus a week back.

He's played an absolute blinder and everybody knows the end game is a free transfer to Real Madrid with another massive sign on and huge wages. Fair play to the guy.

[Guest]

The discussion in the last couple of pages is missing the mark a bit, for me. Folk questioning whether these elite players should boycott certain nations. It's surely more relevant to consider why certain global regions end up with such immense wealth that can then be used to sway these players.

How England and the 90s deregulation of its domestic football market first put European football on its "greed is good" path. How England then used its foothold in former colonies to sell its Premier League in those lucrative markets. Now with Saudi, its wealth was accumulated by being a client state to Western Europe and North America, satiating those regions' ravenous appetite for oil. Americans can buy Premier League clubs because their nation state has used military might to fix the global economy in their favour, with international trade being done in dollars. We only don't boycott USA or even talk of it because its practically unfeasable, such is their level of control as global hegemon.

There's a lot going on and just raging at individual players is really missing the point. For all their exhorbitant remuneration, they are ultimately still workers. It's owners not workers who cause the inequality and problems.

[Squalor Vic]

15 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

Jamal Khashoggis family will now be a little more a peace, having learned from some roaster on P&B that his being chainsawed alive was in fact, merely an innocent botched kidnapping. Something that can happen to anyone really. 

Just a bit of a misunderstanding really wasn't it. 'Not great' lolz

[Thistle_do_nicely]

Mrrrrhm. Had a brief experience in the middle east and anti-semitism is very, very much rampant, was striking. Any references to Israel and parts of the Jewish faith is literally blacked out of school textbooks, ethnic slurs during parliament etc.

Im not jewish personally but i suspect that might lead to some awkward questions for people taking saudi megabux.

Edit: aye, this stuff

https://www.thejc.com/news/news/police-in-kuwait-shut-down-shop-selling-magen-david-necklaces-1lghWRXEOSQrjkAZ35m7HE

Or a saudi specific example:

https://nes.princeton.edu/publications/west-christians-and-jews-saudi-arabian-schoolbooks

Edited July 24, 2023 by Thistle_do_nicely

[Satoshi]

21 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

Jamal Khashoggis family will now be a little more a peace, having learned from some roaster on P&B that his being chainsawed alive was in fact, merely an innocent botched kidnapping. Something that can happen to anyone really. 

 

It has been widely reported as a botched kidnapping.

 Not that the Saudi regime doesn't kill people - it absolutely does. Inside and outside Saudi Arabia. And it kidnaps dissidents too. 

It they wanted to kill Khassoghi they wouldn't have done it the way they did (ridiculously badly and publicly). There's many podcasts on this - listen to the conflicted episode on it if you don't believe me.

His family is still in Saudi Arabia - widely reported they took blood money for the killing (nothing wrong with that from their side).

I'm not arguing the Saudi regime is great - of course it isn't. Lots of bad things happen there, including this bizarre football vanity project. There is inequality and an all powerful monarch - many of the worst things go unreported.

It's absolutely not the responsibility of people who work there. The western media attitude to the middle east is patronising and deeply out of date.

The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, by the UK and US in the last 20 years, have killed far more people than Saudi Arabia ever had (including many journalists incidentally). The US is possibly the world leader in targeted assassinations and frequently kidnaps and extradited prisoners to black sites to be held and tortured without trial. Yet (correctly) no criticism of Messi moving to inter Miami.

So it's not other countries are also bad, it's other countries (including us) are actually much more violent in that part of the world. And to look down on those people working there? What a load of hypocritical pish.

13 hours ago, DoingThe42 said:

This is an example of the damage shite like Twitter has done to discussion in our society. People who want to defend the indefensible only have to play the whataboutery card.

This is a piss-poor defence of a dreadful part of the world. You want to feel ok about (at least defending others, but I'm assuming you also did yourself) making money living in a place that built its ability to offer you wealth on slavery and the utter misery of the people who existed to serve you. And to do that, you try to argue that there's no moral black hole in that because other places aren't perfect either. I understand where the need for the moral and mental gymnastics comes from, but it's just not a credible point to make.

You basically took a bribe (assuming you took the ME $$$, you haven't said where) to put moral considerations to one side. I don't know your financial circumstances or why you did it, but that's what you did. These footballers are doing the same. They have no need to do so and I am happy to call them dicks for doing so.

I was offered the bribe. I'm fucking skint, but I said no. I remain fucking skint, but I still wouldn't change my answer.

I have absolutely no doubt that if you respond it'll be with another "But what about". If you like.

So, hold on, you refused to go to a place to work (somewhere it seems you have never been) because you think it's a "dreadful part of the world" and you think this makes you some sort of morally upstanding hero?

Good god, you could hardly prove my point about the arrogant and patronising attitude of people in the west any better.

Some people go to work abroad and last 5 minutes because they can't get their Tennant's super brew and English breakfast - but at least they try. It doesn't seem you even made it that far.

When I first moved abroad, and first moved to the middle east, it wasn't for money - I actually took a pay cut both times. I thought the world was bigger than the Scottish village I grew up in - and looking at some of the posts on this thread I'm incredibly glad I did.

I mentioned Honduras earlier and I worked and lived there years ago, I didn't feel morally conflicted because it was a thuggish gangster regime who hated gays - and I equally didn't feel conflicted when I worked in the middle east which was far safer. I've never worked for any government agencies, I'm either private sector or NGO.

Same as the commentary on the Qatar world cup, if you want somewhere totally unobjectionable it's either Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland or Denmark (and there's actually still plenty of wrong things with these countries).

No one's perfect. You aren't a morally better person just because you decided to stay where you were born your whole life, whilst calling places you have never been "a dreadful part of the world".

If you aren't willing to leave your cul de sac, at least read Rory Stewarts the places in between. There is beauty in all parts of the world.

12 hours ago, DoingThe42 said:

Not really. While UK policy towards refugees is poor, the UK doesn't criminalise being a refugee. It took in over 16,000 in 2022.

We may agree that the UK's policy is very bad, but it's not comparable with cutting up journalists (and not even really trying to seriously deny it), while having a society structured on medieval grounds denying a lot of people basic rights.

There are no perfect countries. But there are some that are much worse than others.

Hardly think the UK or the US can take the moral high ground when they have the perpetrators of two of the most brutal invasions this millennium (both of which were complete failures that left hundreds of thousands of civilians dead). And that's before you get into the pre 21st century crimes of the UK and US.

This is getting wildly off topic so let's surmise and get back to the football. In the west you are taught from a young age that we are the moral arbiters and it's only other nations that have terrible human rights records. There is lots of ignorance in the view, with a healthy dash of patronising racism.

This couldn't be better emphasized when players going to Saudi Arabia are being criticised but not those going to, say, Russia (pre Ukraine war) or the US.

The only way to understand the world is to actually live in it and try and break you western pre conceived ideas.

The middle east can be a very nice place to live, like anywhere else there are some bad parts and some good parts. Omanis are incredibly, almost ludicrously friendly and generous to guests whereas Kuwaitis are pretty much the opposite.

You don't have to agree with a countries government to live there, and if you did you probably shouldn't live in the UK (the world's supervillains for the last 300 years).

If you put your moral faith in Jordan Henderson and he let you down - thats on you. Let's hope those going to Saudi Arabia continue to liberalise the country which has changed massively since MBS took charge (for good and bad).

If you hated the last world cup because you thought the Qatar regime in 2022 was worse than Russia in 2018 - then good god educate yourself.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Satoshi

[Derry Alli]

*service announcement*

Please stop engaging with this poster. He tries exceptionally hard to be controversial on any and every topic he posts on.

*end of message*

[D Angelo Barksdale]

I make that 4 or 5 times the Iraq War has been mentioned now.