Newcastle's Muslim Players may not play in Wonga Shirts

First topic message reminder :

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/newcastles-muslim-stars-told-dont-play-in-new-wonga-tops-8204411.html
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2012-10-09/newcastles-muslim-warned-against-wearing-wonga-sponsored-shirts/

Essentially, the religion of the eternally offended, er... I mean the Muslim Council of Britain, have warned Newcastle's Muslim players (Cisse, Ba, Ben Arfa, Tiote) to not wear the new shirts as it infringes Sharia law. I wonder how this will all pan out, thoughts?

Could having sponsors on football team's shirts have an adverse effect too? Like how many Liverpool fans will want to buy a Chevrolet now that it's on Man Utd's shirts?

I thought they were going to be upset about Wonga's exploitation of the OOmpa Loompas

Advertising works by having your logo shown, not by having some half witted footballer pretend he's endorsing it.

No one really thinks Ben Arfa uses Wonga as a service.

Man Utd are sponsored by DHL Lorus, Would a scouser refuse delivery of their dole cheque if it was delivered by DHL?

lorus59 wrote:Could having sponsors on football team's shirts have an adverse effect too? Like how many Liverpool fans will want to buy a Chevrolet now that it's on Man Utd's shirts?

Liverpool are a global brand. But it may make the scousers steal some Chevvy's.

super_realist wrote:Advertising works by having your logo shown, not by having some half witted footballer pretend he's endorsing it.

No one really thinks Ben Arfa uses Wonga as a service.

Man Utd are sponsored by DHL Lorus, Would a scouser refuse delivery of their dole cheque if it was delivered by DHL?

Yes and having your logo shown on popular footballer legitimises it. Wonga are doing it to get more people to use their services.

Any publicity is good publicity right? So a bit of controversy has everyone talking about Wonga.

You'd have to be an idiot to go to one of those places though right?

super_realist wrote:You'd have to be an idiot to go to one of those places though right?

Desperate people will do desperate things.

Like support Newcastle?

super_realist wrote:You'd have to be an idiot to go to one of those places though right?

Absolutely. But they made a £59m profit last year and want more. This was a business decision for them to get more people to borrow from them so they can put their 4000% interest in place. Usually the most desperate and vulnerable. They are vultures and well done to the MCB in putting some fear into them.

To be fair to them, representative APR (the 4000% quoted by the MCB) is not what they actually charge, APR that they actually charge is closer to 360% but they are obliged by law to advertise the representative rate, they don't lend for a year anyway.

331 for 250 over 30 days is still a hefty charge, but it's nowhere near 4000%. It's just over 30%

It's still an absolute rip off designed to target the stupid and desperate but it's nowhere near the Shylock terms people say.

I cant be bothered to read the links again, but was the 4000% claim made by MCB?

Whether or not it was, The company is being slated for charging 4000% interest, when they don't, not even close.

Actually it is important who said it was 4000%. Your instinct was to assume it was the MCB and therefore paint them in a bad light. Likewise the OP blamed the muslims when it was practicaly a wide range of people which included muslim groups.

But anyway:

Wonga, whose deal to succeed Virgin Money begins next season, drew criticism from MPs for the level of interest charged on its 30-day loans. If a Newcastle supporter took out a loan to purchase a £49.99 club shirt, he would have to repay £71.92 after one month – a rate that would be equivalent to 4,212 per cent over a year.

Looks like 40000+5 to me.

It is irrelevant what the interest rate (a compounded interest rate by the way) might be after 1 year, 10 year or a million years, because they don't offer loans on those repayment terms.

You'd have to be sad to be over 18 and buy a football shirt anyway however,
The interest rate for that shirt at £50 (£21/50) over a month is actually 42%, still scandalously high though.

Its irrelevant if its 40, 400 or 4000%. As you say its a scandal. Bear in mind that newcastle has the highest insolvency rate in the UK and the club is integral to the city. It is beyond a joke that they should sponsor a shirt which encourages people to take short term gain for very long term paid and gets them deeper into a circle of debt/poverty. The MCB and all others who have voiced concerns are spot on in this. I'm sure you will applaud the MCB for their position.

"You'd have to be sad to be over 18 and buy a football shirt."

There are millions of sad people all over the world then. People need to wear clothes so buy a knock-off football shirt and it will do as well as anything. But to go to the club's shop and pay full price is putting money in greedy footballers's pockets.

I can't believe I'm defending this horrible company, but really no one is forced to use them and they do only offer very small (<£500) short term(<30 day) loans.



As for grown ups wearing Football shirts for anything other than sport. Is there any thing less stylish and less horrible on the skin than a polyester/nylon football shirt emblazoned with garish sponsors.

Its a question of personal taste. Some like them, some dont. You wont catch me wearing skinny jeans, but people like them. Ho hum.

azania wrote:When making such a decision, the board should take into consideration the company's assets. Players are part of that asset.

Players can take a pay-cut when an alternative (lower) sponsor is found then.....oh, wait, except they won't, will they?!

Typical BS from MCB.

super_realist wrote:As for grown ups wearing Football shirts for anything other than sport. Is there any thing less stylish and less horrible on the skin than a polyester/nylon football shirt emblazoned with garish sponsors.

A tracksuit maybe.Its p.bad tho.

Errr, what is your point? The MCB haven't mentioned the player's salary and being good muslims, the players should give a proportion to charities to help the poor.

Anyway, have you read the link? All groups have attacked the deal, not just the MCB. Credit to the MCB though for reminding the players of their religious oblligations. The CofE should do the same and perhaps players like Rooney would score goals as opposed to scoring grannies.

Beer wrote:

azania wrote:Not really. It is well known that muslims do not associate with usuary. People should be glad anyway. Who wants their club to be associated with a company like Wonga? Vile Shylock type company.

I don't really care who sponsors the club. It's up to the board to make those decisions. They may rip people off, but if it was breaking any laws they'd be shut down.

Of course it would be shut down. Just like The Sun?

Making money will keep you afloat no matter what discrepancies have gone on.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:

Beer wrote:

azania wrote:Not really. It is well known that muslims do not associate with usuary. People should be glad anyway. Who wants their club to be associated with a company like Wonga? Vile Shylock type company.

I don't really care who sponsors the club. It's up to the board to make those decisions. They may rip people off, but if it was breaking any laws they'd be shut down.

Of course it would be shut down. Just like The Sun?

Making money will keep you afloat no matter what discrepancies have gone on.

I think a money lending company would be more at risk than a red top rag that prints lies.

Beer wrote:

Josiah Maiestas wrote:

Beer wrote:

azania wrote:Not really. It is well known that muslims do not associate with usuary. People should be glad anyway. Who wants their club to be associated with a company like Wonga? Vile Shylock type company.

I don't really care who sponsors the club. It's up to the board to make those decisions. They may rip people off, but if it was breaking any laws they'd be shut down.

Of course it would be shut down. Just like The Sun?

Making money will keep you afloat no matter what discrepancies have gone on.

I think a money lending company would be more at risk than a red top rag that prints lies.

Look on Twitter even MP's who have never borrowed from Wonga understand how awful this company is, not breaking the law does not make it fine to ruin people's lives.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23347131

Papiss Cisse has pulled out of a pre-season tour to Portugal because of the Wonga logo. He refuses to wear it on religious grounds.

Offload to Anzhi for £18m should sort the situation out nicely. Can't believe the club hasn't sold him on yet and have let this rumble on and on. Embarrassing, but what else do you expect from Newcastle United football club.

1) Agree John...goodbye Papiss get yourself away to Anzhi for £18m as he's clearly trying to engineer a move away.

2) Can i just ask, isnt Virgin Money (last seasons sponsors) essentially the same as Wonga, just with maybe different rates.
So whats the difference...oh you want to go play in Russia and get huge wages...well goodbye Papiss.

There's a fairly big difference between Wonga and Virgin Money I'd say

Olly wrote:There's a fairly big difference between Wonga and Virgin Money I'd say

Yes. Wonga are payday parasites whereas Virgin aren't.

I thought that was common knowledge.

FreekShow wrote:

Olly wrote:There's a fairly big difference between Wonga and Virgin Money I'd say

Yes. Wonga are payday parasites whereas Virgin aren't.

I thought that was common knowledge.

But here the difference is irrelevant, hence the comment.

Sharia-compliant investment prevents Muslims (that adhere to it) from earning money through interest. It says nothing about whether that interest is 1% or 1000%. The conflict is not to do with the lending practices (i.e. legalised loan-shark vs highstreet bank) but with the fact the company lends at all (and earns profits through interest).

Therefore when the moral objections are based in Islam, Wonga and Virgin are one and the same.

Thanks Top Hats what i was angling at...different companies but essentially if he wasnt happy with Wonga he shouldnt have played with the Virgin sponsorship either...

Ah right didn't realise it was like that Tophat, cheers for clearing it up

No worries Ol, it's a really interesting area where the devil really is in the detail. I occassionaly work with a couple of Islamic banks and it's fascinating what they can/can't do in order to remain with the boundaries of Sharia compliance.

For example, if I go to breakfast with one of their asset managers, if he wants to claim his meal on expenses it can't contain any pork products - so no bacon sarnies! And when they're investing, if they want to buy a supermarket, say, then they have to have an Islamic scholar go round and survey it to make sure not too much of its sales (by revenue and area) are related to alcohol.

Fascinating stuff!

In that regard TopHat, can Virgin Money offer banking alternatives to muslims that fit in with Sharia law? 

It could also be a moral issue, whilst some Muslims are not as strict as others, they may have their limits

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:In that regard TopHat, can Virgin Money offer banking alternatives to muslims that fit in with Sharia law? 

It could also be a moral issue, whilst some Muslims are not as strict as others, they may have their limits

It's very complicated. The Isalmic banks offering Sharia-compliant products & services all have Sharia 'boards' (a bit like non-exec baords at regular banks) that compose of senior Islamic clerics and sometimes Immans etc to approve what's being offered to Muslim customers. I think it would be very difficult for regular high street banks to replicate this.

super_realist wrote:


As for grown ups wearing Football shirts for anything other than sport. Is there any thing less stylish and less horrible on the skin than a polyester/nylon football shirt emblazoned with garish sponsors.

 Couldn't agree more mate, i think so less of people who walk round wearing a football shirt on non match day.

Also full respect to Papa Cisse, complete legend. 

Seems like Newcastle have had a very bad summer, hope they can get problems sorted out before the new season!!!

Proof that it is all complete and utter BS:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2374711/What-odds--40-000-week-Muslim-Premier-league-star-refused-wear-shirt-sponsored-loan-firm-Wonga-spotted-GAMBLING-casino.html

Well well well Papiss

What a hypocrite.

NickisBHAFC wrote:

super_realist wrote:


As for grown ups wearing Football shirts for anything other than sport. Is there any thing less stylish and less horrible on the skin than a polyester/nylon football shirt emblazoned with garish sponsors.

 Couldn't agree more mate, i think so less of people who walk round wearing a football shirt on non match day.

 
Again personal taste.
 
But then again some of us have got more going on in their life than to judge what people are wearing.
 
I couldnt careless if someone is wearing a football shirt in the summer.
Sure as hell aint going to judge them(unless its a blues shirt:whistle: ).

Well if i do see any one over the age of 16 wearing football shirts' in public places e.g. pub, shopping centers, unless there is a reason (e.g. matchday) i do think a very low opinion of them as i class it as a bit pikey and generally embarrassing. 
 
Didn't' mean to cause offensive to anyone though, sorry West mate 

Not offended buddy.
 
We just have different opinions about it.
 
Like I said I wouldnt think anything bad of someone(adult) wearing a football shirt on non match days.

NickisBHAFC wrote:Well if i do see any one over the age of 16 wearing football shirts' in public places e.g. pub, shopping centers, unless there is a reason (e.g. matchday) i do think a very low opinion of them as i class it as a bit pikey and generally embarrassing. 

But you get all uptight if anybody even makes a small quip about Brighton and gays... 

What does that have to do with anything Olly? I get up tight because i don't like people being homophobic, because i consider it as bad as racism. Don't forget gay people could well be on this site, or viewers on this site mate.

NickisBHAFC wrote:What does that have to do with anything Olly? I get up tight because i don't like people being homophobic, because i consider it as bad as racism. Don't forget gay people could well be on this site, or viewers on this site mate.

Indeed, and I laughed at most of what was the supposed "homophobic abuse".

NickisBHAFC wrote:What does that have to do with anything Olly? I get up tight because i don't like people being homophobic, because i consider it as bad as racism. Don't forget gay people could well be on this site, or viewers on this site mate.

Well some people will feel the same way about you calling someone who wears a footie shirt a pikey  

Hence why i said sorry, if im causing offence, pikey is hardly as bad as taking the mick out of someone's sexuality.

NickisBHAFC wrote:Hence why i said sorry, if im causing offence, pikey is hardly as bad as taking the mick out of someone's sexuality.

Could be to some people