Fabinho (DM) to Al-Ittihad

[Sweeting]

I believe he was specifically talking about Evangelicals, and given the damage they have done to the country I live in the whole lot of them can fuck off.

[gasband]

I can understand your sentiments but the club is as guilty as Fabinho himself for agreeing to deal with the SA clubs.

[gasband]

@rab

We’re doing what’s best for the club. You’d rather be playing there than here, fine off you go but we’re doing you no favours to make that happen. If that means making them pay through the nose then so be it. But we’re not out there twerking at them hoping to cash in on players to boost our coffers, these are clubs that have come for our players.

Again that might be true but don’t there is a possibility that it could be the club telling Fabinho that we received a bid and we will accept it and your role in the first team is no longer as previous seasons, you might want to consider your position. So in this case, is it the players fault? If he refuses to move, then risk being seen as blocking the development of the squad? I maintain a if the player is guilty, the club is as guilty. It cannot be oh we are doing the best for our club but then slam the player for doing what’s best for his future.

[rab]

@gasband

Again that might be true but don’t there is a possibility that it could be the club telling Fabinho that we received a bid and we will accept it and your role in the first team is no longer as previous seasons, you might want to consider your position. So in this case, is it the players fault? If he refuses to move, then risk being seen as blocking the development of the squad? I maintain a if the player is guilty, the club is as guilty. It cannot be oh we are doing the best for our club but then slam the player for doing what’s best for his future.

Well yeah, maybe the offer came first but if he doesn’t want to go he can say so and we’d keep him around or his agent could go find him a move elsewhere. But in modern football, clubs rarely make a move for a player without some indication from the player that they’re interested.

I think there’s a huge difference between a player wanting to go there and us facilitating that happening. He’s choosing that as his next move, we’re reacting to the situation that is happening to us. Everyone is looking out for themselves but the club aren’t instigating transfer dealings with these clubs, that is happening because the player has given the club encouragement that he wants to go there.

As a club our options are to refuse to deal with them and potentially keep a player that isn’t happy or negotiate the best deal for themselves that they can. One potentially disrupts the squad, pre-season and potentially into the season. The other has people telling them they shouldn’t take money from these clubs. Not much of a choice.

[JU97ICE]

We may not really get to choose where our players look for new homes, but we’ve been pretty clear in our message this summer. As soon as Szobo was done, we were constantly delivering the message that we wouldn’t buy another midfielder unless there were outgoings. Always that same message. It’s a message to other clubs that our fringe midfielders are not a lock in, and to the players themselves that they are not fully part of our long term plans.

[gasband]

Again we do not know which came first. Me neither, I am just bringing up that we are very quick to put all the blame on the player. Of course Fabinho can refuse to go. And if that comes out, I can guarantee there will still be a section of fans who will blame him for blocking the development of the squad because we lose out on 40m of transfer money.

[Iftikhar]

Any update on his medical/transfer?

[Limiescouse]

@Rambler

I am ashamed and disgusted that we are accepting money from a loathsome regime that carries out mass executions and chopped up a journalist who opposed them. As a club and a fan base can we still bleat on about Newcastle taking their money. It will be hypocrisy of the highest order. We will have lost the moral highground if we were ever on it.

The world is complicated and we have to be able to tell the difference between things that might both be shit but still are in fact different.

I think it is a very defensible position to think we should refuse to do business with any entity funded by a human rights abusing state. But the universe of things that now covers is unfortunately extensive and there are large differences in our individual power to push back on those things. Can we choose not to watch Newcastle games or LIV golf? Sure. Can we refuse to pay taxes because a portion of that goes to give money to the Saudi government to conduct atrocities in Yemen? Of course not. Can we refuse to play in the FIFA CWC because it is in Saudi?

Different responses to different ways saudi money is infiltrating our lives is not necessarily hypocrisy. In some cases it might be, but it is mostly a case of the fact of the number of different ways their money is now part of our lives and the complex set of moral challenges that draws up that different people will have different perspective on how to navigate.

I will not respect any player who chooses to take their money, just like I didnt with the golfers who took LIV money. That doesnt mean I have to expect Rory to retire rather than continue to play on the PGA tour now they’ve reach that resolution because those are pretty clearly different situations and treating them as the same is the path to moral nihilism.

[Quicksand]

@Iftikhar

Any update on his medical/transfer?

It seems that the Evangelists have asked Bolsonaro to intervene because the payment is in mermaids, and they are the wrong colour.
Or something.

[rab]

@gasband

Again we do not know which came first. Me neither, I am just bringing up that we are very quick to put all the blame on the player. Of course Fabinho can refuse to go. And if that comes out, I can guarantee there will still be a section of fans who will blame him for blocking the development of the squad because we lose out on 40m of transfer money.

We can be pretty certain the conversations between them, Fabinho and Mendes happened before we received a bid. That’s how transfers work now. Buying clubs aren’t sending offers to selling clubs out the blue without some indication the player is interested or open to the move. It’s just the way of things.

Ultimately you’re right though, no one is blameless in all of this. He’s doing what he thinks is right for him. We’re acting in the best interests of the club in making sure we get a good valuation for him. Half the fans will complain if we take their money, the other half will complain if we don’t or if Fabinho refuses to go.

Sadly that is modern football. It’s all tinged with moral and ethical quandaries. We all want the best for the club. I think we’d have to be awfully principled to refuse to take money from specific clubs in certain countries on ethical grounds. And you watch, that £40m won’t be sat in our pocket long and I bet no club will refuse to take that money from us when we go calling for his replacement.

Everyone is complicit in it to some degree. I mean we’re talking about transfers between clubs but their national team was at the last world cup, a world cup held in another country with some very sketchy views. Did we all boycott watching that? If not, are we any better than the club or the players we’re sitting in judgement of now?

[sgs]

There’s something deeply odious and hypocritical about PL fans suddenly finding religion about Saudi spending money…

Considering for years PL has been awash with money from all sorts- oligarchs, liquor dealers, porn companies; Asian dictators, etc, etc

But God forbid if it came from the Saudis!!!

For me the real issue is about the governance of football and people playing within the rules and not allowing anyone to monkey about the rules to accumulate 100 charges…

I sympathize and share the concerns of those who highlight social issues.

But I differ from them who seek to use individual players to fight what are much larger issues, which no one individual is responsible for or can make any significant change…

Its too easy to blame it on the other guy.
First walk in their shoes, then come back and tell me how it feels!

[PaulRoJo]

@sgs

But God forbid if it came from the Saudis!!!

MBS and his towels are a whole other level of scum

[sgs]

What makes him worse than someone who went to war on the false pretense of WMD?

[Bekloppt]

Huh? Where did that comparison come from?

[SpecialK210]

@PaulRoJo

MBS and his towels are a whole other level of scum

Xi and China say hi.

[gasband]

Definitely agree.

[RedOverTheWater]

The post seems to tar a whole bunch with the same brush, and it is wide of the mark. It’s the sort of thing I experienced living in various parts of the UK, when people would say stuff like, “thieving Scousers” and such, as though it was a both a fact, and acceptable to denigrate a whole group like that.

Religion isn’t the point of this thread, but I don’t like to see whole groups getting shit on, much less Liverpool players, because of their religion or politics.

[WooltonRed]

@RedOverTheWater

when people would say stuff like, “thieving Scousers”

They still do, unfortunately.

[RedOverTheWater]

@Klopptimist

@RedOverTheWater

I hate that the various authorities in the game have allowed this, by not showing the necessary leadership in protecting the game, setting forth good rules, and then having the backbone and ability to enforce them.

Not sure what any authority could do.

There’s definitely a David v Goliath sort of issue in play, once nation states are in the game.

Some things the authorities could do:

Apply their own rules, first of all.
Supposedly there is a fit and proper persons test for owning a football club. Chopping up journalists and persecuting women and the LGBTQ community should mean that the fit and proper person test is failed.

Also, if the game is evolving so that the rules need to be amended, then amend the rules!

For example, it would be easy to add a rule to say that nation state ownership is not allowed. This would help with the sporting integrity of the competition, and would stop the game from being used as a pawn in a wider geopolitical sports washing scheme.

The authorities have not protected the game adequately, which leads me to think that it is because they are quite ok with the influx of cash that such owners bring.

However…

They are going to be caught between a rock and a hard place if the other clubs decide they have had enough, and organize themselves to do something else.

[aussielad]

Tell them to fuck off would be a good start