In the press room at Stamford Bridge Eddie Howe shifted in his seat. The Newcastle United manager probably expected the questions to come but it did not mean he looked remotely comfortable, or convincing, dealing with them.

Being asked to condemn the execution of 81 men in Saudi Arabia is not the most complex request but Howe did not feel able to do so. It meant that his non-response – only here to talk about football, that is his focus – was proof that ‘sportswashing’ works for the Saudis.

It particularly jarred when Howe added: “I am going to talk football. That’s all I am concerned with.” Really? Is that all Howe is concerned with? It was a statement that surely with hindsight he would retract or qualify.

This is not to attack Howe. It is possible to have sympathy for him in being asked to talk about such issues directly after a Premier League football match when his opening remarks referred to a different kind of injustice after Newcastle were wrongly not awarded a penalty against Chelsea.

It is also possible to have sympathy with him – and with Thomas Tuchel – for being forced to talk about subjects they have no agency in. It does not feel quite right to ask such questions in that environment but, equally, it is not wrong to do so. After all, it has simply never been the case that sport and politics do not mix: both are part of life.

Howe should not be beyond criticism, however. Having taken the highly paid job at Newcastle, and knowing how high profile and controversial the takeover was, Howe cannot really complain if he is asked about the actions of the Saudi state.

He knew who the club’s owners were when he said ‘yes’ to that job offer. Newcastle is 80 per cent owned by the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia and the chairman of that fund is Mohammed bin Salman who is the Saudi Crown Prince. Did it not ever cross his mind to consider that he would be questioned about human rights in Saudi Arabia at some stage and he would have to square that? Did someone who is clearly intelligent and thoughtful and who does his research not, frankly, do his research and consider how it would affect him?

Nobody is denying this is a complex issue. The Saudis were allowed to buy into Newcastle by the Premier League once they proved the club was not ‘state-owned’ and once the piracy of television rights ended, the UK does huge amounts of business with the Saudis.

As one source close to the Newcastle deal said when it first became mired in difficulties: “UK plc is open for business with Saudi Arabia and so this should not prevent Newcastle being sold.” There was nothing in the rules to stop them.

Furthermore, the opening paragraph on the UK government’s Department for International Trade’s website reads: “The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a high-income country. It has a large population, significant purchasing power and a growing reputation as an important destination for many foreign brands and companies in many different sectors.” The language almost salivates at the money-making prospects. There is no mention of human rights.

It means the UK exports around £8.6billion worth of goods a year – including billions in arms sales – so do managers and CEOs at Shell, GlaxoSmithKline, BAE Systems or Rolls Royce face questions such as those asked of Howe?

Even more pertinently, Boris Johnson is set to travel to Saudi Arabia for talks on oil this week as he attempts to move the UK away from its dependence on energy supplies from Russia. Government sources even briefed that Johnson has better links with Bin Salman than any other G7 leader and that the pair exchange WhatsApp messages. It will therefore be interesting to see how he handles questions on the Saudi executions (but then this is the Prime Minister who joked that the UK could become “the Saudi Arabia of penal policy” under Home Secretary Priti Patel).

The Saudis stand accused of buying their stake in Newcastle as an exercise to ‘sportswash’ their human rights record and the war in Yemen. Hiring a young, high-profile manager such as Howe means that, like it or not, he has allowed himself to be complicit in that – especially if he does not challenge it.

Of course, it would help Howe and Newcastle if a more senior figure at the club, such as co-owner Amanda Staveley, spoke publicly to address the issue of how compatible it is to work with the Saudi regime at a Premier League football club and what plans there are to improve the situation.

If Staveley did, she will undoubtedly argue that Bin Salman is modernising the Middle East state, as part of what is termed the Vision 2030 – a vision that has recently gone so far as to allow women to drive. Whatever next?

No-one expects Howe to go too deeply into such issues and no-one would really expect him to have the detailed knowledge to discuss any of them with authority. His primary concern is, of course, the football club, and he has to regard the club as his employer, and not the owners.

“I don’t know what to answer to that,” Howe said when asked how he felt about Bin Salman “ultimately” being his boss. Has he therefore not thought about it?

Howe is undoubtedly in a difficult position but it is also a position in which he placed himself. Unlike many employees at Newcastle and unlike the fans he was not there when there was a change of ownership. That raises the question as to whether a manager might ever turn down a job because of his concern over a regime?

It could happen one day but not, it seems, with Howe.