Spurs is an unexpected club for Arabs to buy up, due to their fairly strong Jewish links. But I can see the attraction for both parties.Spurs fans are not on board with the potential Qatari buy out of the club.
View attachment 21568
Not many supporters in this photie but from what I've read it appears there is many of the fan base against it.
Whether or not ' many' is enough is a matter for debate, I hope that the fans win out on this but not holding my breath
That's probably true, fans will get on with it, eventually.Spurs is an unexpected club for Arabs to buy up, due to their fairly strong Jewish links. But I can see the attraction for both parties.
Like every other club that gets bought out like this, once they get over the initial grumblings and start buying success then the vast majority of the fanbase won't care about the source of their income and will glory in winning trophies or just constantly reaching the Champions League most seasons.
Celtic havevone of the most politicised fanbase of large clubs anywhere, but I suspect if we were bought by one of these trust funds that (after lots of protests, etc) most fans would love being able to financially compete with clubs from the big/rich leagues.
Is there really much difference in being owned by that type of entity or a billionaire like DD who has earned his money using morally dubious - but legal - means? Except of course, they would pump money into us rather than observe us from a distance as a wee curiosity in his massive portfolio.
Rashford clearly interfered with play with his run and blocked the path of the City defender.The offside rule is farcical. In the Manchester derby a through ball is played to Rashford who was 3-4 yards offside. He is running through on goal with the ball (clearly interfering with play) but before he touches the ball Fernandes runs in and shoots first. The goal was disallowed but then the ref and linesman consultband the goal stands. And the BT ex-ref insists this is correct under the new law. How can you defend against this?
Was a ridiculous decision, how is he not interfering with play? Hes preventing city defenders from making a challenge.The offside rule is farcical. In the Manchester derby a through ball is played to Rashford who was 3-4 yards offside. He is running through on goal with the ball (clearly interfering with play) but before he touches the ball Fernandes runs in and shoots first. The goal was disallowed but then the ref and linesman consultband the goal stands. And the BT ex-ref insists this is correct under the new law. How can you defend against this?
According to Rio Ferdinand Rashford did not interfere with the defender. If he wasn't there then the defender had a clear run to get to the ball - but if he had tried that then he would have clattered into Rashford with a red card and dangerous free kick on the edge of the box.Rashford clearly interfered with play with his run and blocked the path of the City defender.
We better not be subject to this nonsense, if England cant get it right after the time theyve had what chance Scotland?According to Rio Ferdinand Rashford did not interfere with the defender. If he wasn't there then the defender had a clear run to get to the ball - but if he had tried that then he would have clattered into Rashford with a red card and dangerous free kick on the edge of the box.
I understand this is the correct decision according to the rules (although I would insist he waa 100% interfering) but what fucktard decided to change the laws to allow this type of unfair goal to stand? Even if this hosl was in our favour then I'd agree that it is not fair.
Ah well, I was hoping both sides would lose as I am not a fan of either.
VAR did not even get involved! The onfield referees decided this and apparently they are 100% correct in their decision. It is the changed law that is an arse.We better not be subject to this nonsense, if England cant get it right after the time theyve had what chance Scotland?
Zero
Aye the offside rule used to be so easy even the wife understood them now its easier to understand a knitting patternThe offside rule is farcical. In the Manchester derby a through ball is played to Rashford who was 3-4 yards offside. He is running through on goal with the ball (clearly interfering with play) but before he touches the ball Fernandes runs in and shoots first. The goal was disallowed but then the ref and linesman consultband the goal stands. And the BT ex-ref insists this is correct under the new law. How can you defend against this?
Think I jinxed us? Nah I know, or I knew aforehand in my head that would happen and was right.VAR did not even get involved! The onfield referees decided this and apparently they are 100% correct in their decision. It is the changed law that is an arse.
I have watched some of his stuff and all his videos are good . If memory serves me right I'm sure Jim Craig opened their stand or club house in the above video , theirs a Good one of his against Hibs at Easter Road 0-4 where he goes to a memorabilia shop next to /near the stadium .Came across this Vid on Youtube, never heard of this team, well why would you. This guy makes some interesting vids though, he covers a lot of lower league Scottish games.
If seen that, also a lot of people saying it a spoof/fake accountWell known blogger claiming Jura is off to Barca subject to personal terms. £14 Mill as Barca have secured funds.