Reasons the board haven’t sacked Brendan

[5waller5]

7 minutes ago, SkidsFox said:

They're making a fortune on betting markets laying off bets from punters who think Brendan will be the next manager to be sacked. The worse we play, the more they rake it in.

This is genius - you’ve nailed it! 

[indierich06]

11 hours ago, oadby.fox said:

Why would it cost £10m? If that’s indeed his salary then we are obliged to pay it whatever happens and this will have already been accounted for financially.

 

It has nothing to do with finances. Surely if we were that hamstrung then we would’ve offloaded players like Praet on the cheap rather than holding out for unlikely higher offers. 
 

 

If we have to pay him off, then we need to add a new manager's wages to our bill on top of the compensation we've paid him - that's the only thing I can think of? Perhaps there are potential penalties on the horizon if we pay him the £10m as a lump sum, rather than in regular wage installments?

 

No clue to be honest. But he needs to get gone. There doesn't seem to be any logical reason - apart from finances - as to why he's still here. If it's not the compo, then there are bigger problems at this club.

[Clever Fox]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

I can only conclude the players actually are still behind him and like him. Which frankly is even more worrying. 

I've heard comments to that effect but it certainly did not look like it yesterday. Players stopped running and chasing when we lost the ball.

[Ely fox]

Just now, Clever Fox said:

I've heard comments to that effect but it certainly did not look like it yesterday. Players stopped running and chasing when we lost the ball.

Agree. The players will say any old bs won’t they? Actions on the pitch speak louder than words anyway. Second half they looked like they couldn’t be bothered. 

[Deeg67]

2 hours ago, CloudFox said:

Top wants us to win the league again, and believes the only way for us to do so is by being bottom at Christmas the previous season 👀👀👀

As long as he's not particular about which league, we could be on course.

[Manley Farrington-Brown]

13 minutes ago, indierich06 said:

No clue to be honest. But he needs to get gone. There doesn't seem to be any logical reason - apart from finances - as to why he's still here. If it's not the compo, then there are bigger problems at this club.

Other way round. If the reason he's still there is because they can't afford to sack him, then any other problems fade into nothingness beside that.

[indierich06]

2 minutes ago, Manley Farrington-Brown said:

Other way round. If the reason he's still there is because they can't afford to sack him, then any other problems fade into nothingness beside that.

I think our financial problems are more temporary and down to FFP rules changes from what I've read though - seems that it's all due to wages/'squad cost' vs turnover. We have a lot of relatively big earners out of contract next season, and our wages-to-turnover should be much lower. Leaves us in a sticky situation at present though, and I'd say it's worth taking a potential future FFP hit to ensure we stay up this season. Going down would be far more catastrophic for our finances.

[Bert]

15 hours ago, Foxxed said:

So nobody wants to manage us because we’re skint?

 

Wasn’t @Bert saying we weren’t skint?

 

 

It’s not that we are skint. It’s the fact that we are close to the FFP threshold. 

[An Sionnach]

I am sure Rodgers is as frustrated as most on here that Top will not pay up , he wants out ASAP , he knows that this part of his career is over. The astute  businessman in him though will never give up millions of pounds and so we have a stand off.

[nettle]

16 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

I've heard comments to that effect but it certainly did not look like it yesterday. Players stopped running and chasing when we lost the ball.

This is actually what I thought, I'm pleased someone else spotted it.

[Deeg67]

37 minutes ago, nettle said:

This is actually what I thought, I'm pleased someone else spotted it.

It was being discussed quite openly as it happened in the stream I was watching.

[Manley Farrington-Brown]

It's suddenly blindingly obvious that they've been waiting for Steve Bruce to be available.

You mark my words, things will happen pretty darned fast now.

[Chrysalis]

2 hours ago, Ely fox said:

Yeah I agree. If Forest lose tonight the fans will be saying why did we give Cooper a new three year contract? Cooper will struggle with this level because of the level and the many many new players. An older manager with experience could have worked due to the ridiculous situation they are in. 

Totally different situation, he just got them promoted and their bad form has been just the start of this season, he needs to gel them, whilst for us Rodgers has been in decline for over a year and is managing an established team.

[nettle]

1 hour ago, Deeg67 said:

It was being discussed quite openly as it happened in the stream I was watching.

No one has mentioned it on here well not many people anyway 

[Tomek]

They’re incompetent. 

[Deeg67]

31 minutes ago, nettle said:

No one has mentioned it on here well not many people anyway 

It was along the lines of "I was watching to see how Leicester would react to giving up those two goals, because it will tell us a lot about the players' state of mind.  And it certainly did."

[Ely fox]

3 hours ago, indierich06 said:

I think our financial problems are more temporary and down to FFP rules changes from what I've read though - seems that it's all due to wages/'squad cost' vs turnover. We have a lot of relatively big earners out of contract next season, and our wages-to-turnover should be much lower. Leaves us in a sticky situation at present though, and I'd say it's worth taking a potential future FFP hit to ensure we stay up this season. Going down would be far more catastrophic for our finances.

😯 I really hope that you are right. I have my doubts though to be fair. 

[benfica]

Someone posted on here a short time ago that part of his latest contract was a seat on the Board.

Seems feasible with all that is happening.

Does anybody know who the complete Board members are?

[He aint bald]

messed up pust

Edited 10 October 2022 by He aint bald
premature posting

[indierich06]

1 minute ago, benfica said:

Someone posted on here a short time ago that part of his latest contract was a seat on the Board.

Seems feasible with all that is happening.

Does anybody know who the complete Board members are?

Top: Thanks for joining me for this board meeting today. Ok, so are we all agreed? We sack Rodgers and bring in a new manager.
Brendan: Veto.

[Guy]

2 hours ago, Manley Farrington-Brown said:

It's suddenly blindingly obvious that they've been waiting for Steve Bruce to be available.

You mark my words, things will happen pretty darned fast now.

....or even Chris Wilder = which wouldn't be a bad shout really! 

[He aint bald]

My serious question is just how stable is the political situation in Thailand? Whilst there are worse regime backed owners in sports, the elephant in the room is that King Power is or was close to the Royal family.... it is in  the name.

Can you imagine the uproar if Liverpool had been aquired by an associate of her late majesty and Anfield called or sponsered by Queen Power?

Whatever we may think about our Royalty, Thailand works in multiples..........

 

 

 

BANGKOK, Sept 12 (Reuters) - A Thai court sentenced a political activist to two years in prison on Monday for insulting the monarchy, her lawyer said, after the activist was judged to have dressed as Queen Suthida during a street protest the court ruled mocked the royal family.

 

I know there are threads and comments on this but in general we dont seem to talk about it much. It is a genuine question as I only browse much of the international news (the best way to get incomplete information) but if King Power are worried about a political backlash, there really might not be any more money.

 

 

 

[Lambert09]

56 minutes ago, He aint bald said:

My serious question is just how stable is the political situation in Thailand? Whilst there are worse regime backed owners in sports, the elephant in the room is that King Power is or was close to the Royal family.... it is in  the name.

Can you imagine the uproar if Liverpool had been aquired by an associate of her late majesty and Anfield called or sponsered by Queen Power?

Whatever we may think about our Royalty, Thailand works in multiples..........

 

 

 

BANGKOK, Sept 12 (Reuters) - A Thai court sentenced a political activist to two years in prison on Monday for insulting the monarchy, her lawyer said, after the activist was judged to have dressed as Queen Suthida during a street protest the court ruled mocked the royal family.

 

I know there are threads and comments on this but in general we dont seem to talk about it much. It is a genuine question as I only browse much of the international news (the best way to get incomplete information) but if King Power are worried about a political backlash, there really might not be any more money.

 

 

 

The situation in Thailand has been like this for a long time, the Army running the country was the bigger problem though. 

 

the defamation laws in Thailand are very strict, but that is not just for the monarchy (even though that is obviously taken 100x more seriously) But you can say something about your neighbour and end up in big trouble. 

 

The late King was loved by the majority, his son has always been seen as a bit of loon. He did some odd things, including making his dog the head of the air force. There was a little disturbance as the princess was much loved and graceful so people wanted the king to pass the throne to her. (that wouldve shaken our stadium name up) 

 

However, the politics in thailand have been in turmoil for a decade or more and there’s no reason this would be any more problematic than in the past. The issue we would have had was when the airport auctions came in, but king power won the contract. So the only issue they face is the reluctance of tourists to flock back in their old numbers … something all people in the industry face… wolves another example. 

 

The issues we are seeing are club made and nothing to do with external matters 

Edited 10 October 2022 by Lambert09

[pedmcl]

My theory is that Top and the board must have done some reflecting and feel that they should shoulder the blame for a lot of our issues, hence why they are giving Rodgers plenty of time. 

 

As much as I'd like him to stay and turn it around, I can't see how there's much other way that Rodgers has survived if you look at the results alone - we simply haven't performed well enough and usually that's enough for the manager to be sacked. 

 

Either that, or we genuinely can't afford it, or they don't think that there is a suitable alternative available. 

[Dames]

5 hours ago, Bert said:

It’s not that we are skint. It’s the fact that we are close to the FFP threshold. 

Since we are in danger of not playing in Europe again for a decade is this really a worry right now? Unless they are trying to get a head start on the Football Leagues version of FFP next season…