You're right I didn't mention 49ers and you're right to think they;re part of teh problem.

How many times do we have to hear how much they've benefitted us with their knowledge of sports.....and what tangibly do we have to show for that?

A partnership with Rocnation?
Some extra administrative expenses to cover their flights and hotels?

I'm not a fan of multiple owners at all, multiple stakeholders rarely have exactly the same goals.

Bielsa is too humble, dignified, professional, has self respect mannerism and way about him in terms of conduct, personality and character that is beyond anyone in "modern day" football to even complain or whinge.
———

Agree jonty

What annoys me even more is that they thinking putting a fekking piece of paper up to make the 49ers and Radz look good… A purely promotional driven exercise to impress those watching overseas?I found it embarrassing.Failed to invest in January so that’s why we are where we are.Pathetic.

AR too media driven doesn’t really care about the club.

A14 let me ask you a question.

Go for it

moan moan moan

you lot are never happy

A14, you support the Palestinian cause right?

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 26 minutes ago
A14, you support the Palestinian cause right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, iamongst many other causes….

comment by kammys left foot (U21862)
posted 48 minutes ago
moan moan moan

you lot are never happy
----------------------------------------------------------------------

What is there to be happy about right now though?

comment by A14... 152-0 T20 + Tea was fantastic پاکستان زِنده باد (U2805)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 26 minutes ago
A14, you support the Palestinian cause right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, iamongst many other causes….
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ok, so I'm on other side of fence, but reason I asked was to show how we can keep politics and sport separate.

Its a theme we're talking a lot about in tennis at moment with Russian players being banned from Wimbledon.

I am personally very disappointed and actually disgusted with Wimbledon for banning Russian and Belarusian tennis players who have each distanced themselves publicly from Putin and his cronies.

I do not see how their involvement at Wimbledon can be perceived to be showing support for Putin's invasion of Ukraine and Wimbledon's reasoning that Russian media will twist their countrymen and women's involvement at Wimbledon to be some type of validation of Putin's invasion to me is ludicrous.

Hopefully the rest of the tennis worlds condemnation of this stance and the public's disgust of what many consider to be from an elitest and out of touch organisation that has blatently ticked every discriminatory and prejudiced box there is, gives them cause to think again and stick to what they do best and leave Politics out of Sport. Period!

comment by Macca: Emily Bishop's lovechild (U8194)
posted 1 hour, 2 minutes ago
I am personally very disappointed and actually disgusted with Wimbledon for banning Russian and Belarusian tennis players who have each distanced themselves publicly from Putin and his cronies.

I do not see how their involvement at Wimbledon can be perceived to be showing support for Putin's invasion of Ukraine and Wimbledon's reasoning that Russian media will twist their countrymen and women's involvement at Wimbledon to be some type of validation of Putin's invasion to me is ludicrous.

Hopefully the rest of the tennis worlds condemnation of this stance and the public's disgust of what many consider to be from an elitest and out of touch organisation that has blatently ticked every discriminatory and prejudiced box there is, gives them cause to think again and stick to what they do best and leave Politics out of Sport. Period!

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wimbledon is not the first and won't be the last to ban Russian players.

I don't think the purpose is to punish them because they support the war.

But to make life difficult for as many Russians as possible to encourage resenment amongst the people for Putin.

This is the purpose of the array of financial sanctions imposed on the country which is resulting in the pain of the average Russian citizen. that is obviously unfair as they are suffering regardless of their views, and they certainly have not caused this.

But the alternatives appear to be either do nothing, or go to war.

Wimbledon is following government advice as far as I am aware.

Russian football sides have been disqualified from UEFA tournaments also.

I share Murray's view that is obviously unfair, and you certainly can't expect players to sign anything against Russia. But like Murray I don't know the answer is.

It’s an interesting debate and for me I think it’s not a very black and white one like most people are saying. 3 examples below

1 - Russian tennis players and Russian teams being banned - I disagree with this as it’s unfair and these players and teams have NO DIRECT influence on putin or high level decisions

2 - Chelsea owner being banned from ownership of Chelsea - I agree with this. Given Roman’s direct influence and close relationship with putin, personally think this is fair game.

3 - Moeen Ali fined by English cricket board for wearing a wristband in support of Palestinian cause. Again, I disagree with this , but say you ban a player doing that then you have to also ban other players supporting other sumialr causes and show consistency. The governance of sporting authorities can’t pick and mix to whatever suits their agenda. Either allow it and allow for all, or ban it and ban for all….

But as I said there’s no perfect answer on this one

The biggest challenge is who is the arbiter?

Who decides which cause ok and which isn’t?

Who decides what constitutes a big enough conflict?

Keep all out of sport.

comment by Jonty (U4614)
posted 45 minutes ago
The biggest challenge is who is the arbiter?

Who decides which cause ok and which isn’t?

Who decides what constitutes a big enough conflict?

Keep all out of sport.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
No, sport is one tool by which pressure can be put on regimes that commit human rights atrocities. There are clear precedents, South Africa for one.
Politics is everywhere in sport.
If a prominent Russian athlete, who is travelling the world and is seeing, as we all are, what is happening in Ukraine, but says nothing, does not condemn Putin and the Russian state for their actions, are they not guilty of collusion. If a Russian athlete wants to compete. They should condemn what is happening, again their are precedents, defectors. I know it would be dangerous but why should an athlete who is a supporter of Putin's regime expect to be welcomed with open arms by the world's sporting communities.
It is inconsistent mind you, North Korean athletes take part at the Olympics and in World Cup qualification for example but, whilst Kim Yong-Un, is a nasty piece of work his regime is guilty of little more than saber-rattling. Should the Korean athletes be banned, probably, but as North Korea doesn't present a major danger, especially as they are controlled by China and in any case they are not a great world sporting power, the world can afford to turn a blind eye to what goes on there.
Israeli's and Palestinians are both guilty of Human Rights violations, the indiscriminate bombing of civilians and there's an argument for wider sporting bans, even if it is to maintain consistency.

i dont think many north korean athletes back the regime of kim yong un. they're just pawns as are the russians probably. denouncing putin is probably the fastest way to not compete in any sporting events. you'll be in jail in a flash. you can defect but what if you dont want to leave your family behind.

Back to football - Lewis Cook back in the PL - Bournemouth just beaten Forest 1-0