Click here for Arsenal FC news and reports

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 54

Thread: This Kroenke hunting thing is repugnant, but there is some pretty empty moral

  1. #1

    This Kroenke hunting thing is repugnant, but there is some pretty empty moral

    grandstanding going on around it.

    People are acting as though they are in some way forced to fund Kroenke's activities by dint of being Arsenal fans. By all means have a moan about it and if you feel that strongly about it, withdraw your custom. But don't let's pretend you don't have a choice about whether to give Arsenal Football Club money, ffs!

    As with so many issues, I really do feel there's a case for having the words 'REMEMBER YOU ARE JUST A CUSTOMER OF A BUSINESS WITH THE RIGHT TO WITHDRAW YOUR CUSTOM WHENEVER YOU LIKE' tattooed inside the eyelids of most football fans.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Burney View Post
    grandstanding going on around it.

    People are acting as though they are in some way forced to fund Kroenke's activities by dint of being Arsenal fans. By all means have a moan about it and if you feel that strongly about it, withdraw your custom. But don't let's pretend you don't have a choice about whether to give Arsenal Football Club money, ffs!

    As with so many issues, I really do feel there's a case for having the words 'REMEMBER YOU ARE JUST A CUSTOMER OF A BUSINESS WITH THE RIGHT TO WITHDRAW YOUR CUSTOM WHENEVER YOU LIKE' tattooed inside the eyelids of most football fans.
    Quite. It's a simple moral question. Consider the legions of lowlife Chelsea supporters who continued to buy seasont tickets at Stamford Bridge despite the club being owned by a gangster drenched in blood money; we quite rightly condemned them as morally bankrupt scum.

    I can't see that there is a decision to be made. Clearly any decent human being is going to withdraw all support until such a time as Kroenke moves on.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Burney View Post
    grandstanding going on around it.

    People are acting as though they are in some way forced to fund Kroenke's activities by dint of being Arsenal fans. By all means have a moan about it and if you feel that strongly about it, withdraw your custom. But don't let's pretend you don't have a choice about whether to give Arsenal Football Club money, ffs!

    As with so many issues, I really do feel there's a case for having the words 'REMEMBER YOU ARE JUST A CUSTOMER OF A BUSINESS WITH THE RIGHT TO WITHDRAW YOUR CUSTOM WHENEVER YOU LIKE' tattooed inside the eyelids of most football fans.
    If they armed the animals, this sort of thing would never happen. :chief:

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir C View Post
    Quite. It's a simple moral question. Consider the legions of lowlife Chelsea supporters who continued to buy seasont tickets at Stamford Bridge despite the club being owned by a gangster drenched in blood money; we quite rightly condemned them as morally bankrupt scum.

    I can't see that there is a decision to be made. Clearly any decent human being is going to withdraw all support until such a time as Kroenke moves on.
    You realise, of course, that that means cancelling your Sky Sports subscription?

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir C View Post
    Quite. It's a simple moral question. Consider the legions of lowlife Chelsea supporters who continued to buy seasont tickets at Stamford Bridge despite the club being owned by a gangster drenched in blood money; we quite rightly condemned them as morally bankrupt scum.

    I can't see that there is a decision to be made. Clearly any decent human being is going to withdraw all support until such a time as Kroenke moves on.
    I've just renewed my red membership I won't next year. That'll learn the wiggy cùnt.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir C View Post
    Quite. It's a simple moral question. Consider the legions of lowlife Chelsea supporters who continued to buy seasont tickets at Stamford Bridge despite the club being owned by a gangster drenched in blood money; we quite rightly condemned them as morally bankrupt scum.

    I can't see that there is a decision to be made. Clearly any decent human being is going to withdraw all support until such a time as Kroenke moves on.
    Personally I don’t see any crossover between his business interests funding this TV channel and my continued support for a football team.

    I don’t like the former and obviously won’t be a subscriber but will happily continue with the latter.

    One is not so naïve to think that people like the Hill Woods, Dein or even Fizsman did not push some boundaries, moral or otherwise, in their accumulation of the millions of pounds they are/were worth.

    For the record I have never condemned Chelsea supporters for any acts relevant to the ownership of the club.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Burney View Post
    You realise, of course, that that means cancelling your Sky Sports subscription?
    Well, there are degrees. If you take it that far, it would also mean cancelling my TV licence, which would mean not being allowed to watch any TV, so that might be a little extreme.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by SWv2 View Post
    Personally I don’t see any crossover between his business interests funding this TV channel and my continued support for a football team.

    I don’t like the former and obviously won’t be a subscriber but will happily continue with the latter.

    One is not so naïve to think that people like the Hill Woods, Dein or even Fizsman did not push some boundaries, moral or otherwise, in their accumulation of the millions of pounds they are/were worth.

    For the record I have never condemned Chelsea supporters for any acts relevant to the ownership of the club.
    That's absolutely fine. Not feeling strongly about it is a perfectly defensible position. What is less defensible is expressing your outrage whilst having the means available to make a meaningful protest and then not making that protest.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir C View Post
    Well, there are degrees. If you take it that far, it would also mean cancelling my TV licence, which would mean not being allowed to watch any TV, so that might be a little extreme.
    But it's a massive source of funding to all football clubs

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Burney View Post
    That's absolutely fine. Not feeling strongly about it is a perfectly defensible position. What is less defensible is expressing your outrage whilst having the means available to make a meaningful protest and then not making that protest.
    Well I do feel strongly in that I believe such killing of animals, whether ethical or not, when done as a sport (very important distinction this) is disgusting.

    I myself can however distance the two, the football club I have supported for over 40 years and the fact that the owner of said club also owns a TV channel. I am not convinced that SK personally makes every decision at KSE and thus specifically at this TV channel.

    The whole thing is rum but I struggle with the ultimate link between Danny Welbeck missing an absolute sitter from 7 yards and this other than being intelligent enough to understand global corporate structures

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •