Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed, brother of the president of the UAE, will spend about $100 million to operate a Major League Soccer franchise in Queens, according to a story in the New York Times today.

“Two people with knowledge of the negotiations” told the Times that Sheikh Mansour will operate the MLS’s 20th team, an expansion franchise expected to be known as New York City FC.

An interesting story, and credit to the Times for firming up a rumor that has knocked back and forth across the Atlantic.

The Times prefers to be considered a global newspaper, but two elements of the story identify it as publication still carrying very much of an American perspective.

To wit:

1. The story opens with the notion of “more foreign ownership of sports teams in New York” … noting that a Russian owns the NBA’s Brooklyn Nets and an Austrian company owns the New York Red Bulls of MLS.

That cataloging of foreign ownership (and the hint of something not to be preferred) would not be the top of a story in most of the world, where out-of-country ownership of sports franchises, particularly prominent soccer franchises, is not news. (For example: We would need a half hour to list all the English clubs owned by people who are not English.)

One of them would be Sheikh Mansour himself, who owns Manchester City, a team he bought in 2009 and the 2012 Premier League champions.

My sense is that handling the news in such a way shows that even the New York Times is not yet comfortable with the flow of foreign money into U.S. enterprises. Or at least the guys who write sports are not.

There will be more of this to come, especially if many U.S. sports teams continue to grow as attractive investments. Why would not a man, with cash on hand, want to purchase an NFL or MLB franchise when they seem to increase in value day after day? Especially one in New York, a city many people around the world find appealing?

2. A quotation in the lower half of the story emphasizes the cultural/global divide between even this most august of American newspapers (and its readers) and one of the most prominent sheikhs in the UAE.

Stefan Szymanski, of the University of Michigan, is cited as a man with particular insight into the economics of soccer, and among his quotes is the following observation about the Abu Dhabi royal family:

“These people have a huge interest in political stability. Jihad would be the furthest thing from these people’s minds.”

“Jihad,” when associated with Sheikh Mansour, is at best ill-informed and at worst insulting.

The ruling family of Abu Dhabi, the Al Nahyans, are quite wealthy, overtly progressive and as likely to support “jihad” as the queen of England.

That the Times feels an obligation to tell its audience that Sheikh Mansour owning a soccer franchise need not lead to domestic terror, is very telling.

It suggests that the newspaper believes its readers cannot tell the difference between radical Islam and the measured and sedate Abu Dhabi ruling family … or that the newspaper itself does not know.

Sheikh Mansour’s arrival in MLS may have the beneficial side-effect of educating New York fans and journalists as to what Abu Dhabi’s royals are really about.