Now you are using a slight of hand to make them equivalent in all the ways that would get you off the hook. They aren't.
One has flooded the club with his own money in the sugar daddy fashion and made the club his personal toy, tied to his identity
the other has used business acumen to redirect the club's own resources towards success, without imposing his/their identity on the club. This implies 'running the club' is crucial as pouring in money is not part of the model. As running of the club is the source of our argument, that was the reason I specifically excluded those clubs from the debate - the one you've got lost in.
That's why they are viewed differently by the general footballing public. You may see them as the same thing but I don't and neither do most people.
if you want a sugar daddy, I'm not that interested. We are all free to want whatever we like. I can see why some Newcastle fans are delighted by the developments - I wouldn't be.
Bookmarks