Rudkin

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, Fox92 said:

I'm not in great knowledge of our finances. Is this saying we cannot afford to spend £2.5m on a player (even after promotion pay out) ?

No, it probably means (if it's true) that we couldn't afford to cover his wages or whatever other fees were involved... for all we know, the agent was demanding a large signing-on fee, considering he's going to be on a free in the summer.  

[Basildon Fox]

I am not even sure that Rudkin will be at fault on this if it is down to financies. Certainly will not be all down to him.  I can't see Milan changing the goalposts on a player they are not offering a new deal to and do not play.

 

To go as far as we did trying to sign Sensi, there must have been a belief that we could get the deal done right up to the last minute.  If it then turns out that for FFP reasons we could not do the transfer then somebody is massively at fault.  I imagine that there is a distinct lack of communication between departments and too many egos at the club in positions of authority.  I am sure I have read on here that Whealan and Rudkin do not get on and barely speak.  That should never happen in a business.  You do not have to like who you work with but there should be clear transparency between every department at Leicester.

 

There needed to be a clear out at the end of last season, yet the same people in the top positions are still at the club.  Things go stale and people get too comfortable when they have been at the same company for years. If I failed as badly in my job as what has gone on over the last 18 months I would quite rightly be out of a job.  Failure continues to be rewarded.  It is not even the fact we were relegated (as that can always happen to a club our size), it is the manor of the capitulation before it.  Too many bad choices like overspending and relying on European competition to make up the difference, keeping Rodgers when he should have gone at the end of the 21/22 season and not being able to get overpaid, underused players off the books.  Whoever sanctioned 70k a week for Bertrand for example should have gone on the back of that alone.

 

We need to sweep clean all of the dross on the non playing side as well as the playing side if we want to get back anywhere near to where we were.  I just can't for the life of me see that happening as no one is falling on their sword.  We knew this after the sham inquiry into the disaster of last season.

[CosbehFox]

1 hour ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Coady looked really good in pre season prior to his injury, Vesty stepped in to cover and has been a revelation. In fairness to Coady he is now being judged on the odd game here and there and fleeting appearances from the subs bench, he hasn’t been a failure. 

Financially, he's a failure - dead asset. His inactivity season means he's lost any value he had. He becomes a Praet. Quality questionable for PL. Wages too much at any other level. 

Edited 2 February by CosbehFox

[Claudio Fannieri]

Quick question who is to blame and who loses their job when results on the pitch are not good? the answer is the Manager and quite often his backroom staff 

now in the case of a Director of Football or Sporting Director, their role includes

advising the owner or making the decision to hire & fire managers, set the philosophy and strategy of the club, buy and sell players that have been identified by the recruitment team and managers, manage contract negotiations with existing players and staff, amongst other tasks. 
 

At what stage does Rudkin not take responsibility and accountability for his part in the current financial position, the shitshow regards contract negotiations and the current state of our wage bill and inability to move players on, our relegation from the premier league and his refusal to push for the removal of the poisoned dwarf when it was clear he has downed tools after 2 thrashing’s away to Brighton and Spurs.
 

In any other club or industry he would have gone in the summer if not before. I am amazed that anybody can defend him from that list. Yes we won the league in 2016 and FA Cup in 2021 but that is history, if we can sack Ranieri 9 months after leading us to the title then in the same way Rudkin has to go for the relegation and countless other issues under his watch. 

 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

4 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Quick question who is to blame and who loses their job when results on the pitch are not good? the answer is the Manager and quite often his backroom staff 

now in the case of a Director of Football or Sporting Director, their role includes

advising the owner or making the decision to hire & fire managers, set the philosophy and strategy of the club, buy and sell players that have been identified by the recruitment team and managers, manage contract negotiations with existing players and staff, amongst other tasks. 
 

At what stage does Rudkin not take responsibility and accountability for his part in the current financial position, the shitshow regards contract negotiations and the current state of our wage bill and inability to move players on, our relegation from the premier league and his refusal to push for the removal of the poisoned dwarf when it was clear he has downed tools after 2 thrashing’s away to Brighton and Spurs.
 

In any other club or industry he would have gone in the summer if not before. I am amazed that anybody can defend him from that list. Yes we won the league in 2016 and FA Cup in 2021 but that is history, if we can sack Ranieri 9 months after leading us to the title then in the same way Rudkin has to go for the relegation and countless other issues under his watch. 

 

Exactly, people turned on Rodgers quick enough despite delivering success.

But those same Melons are now calling on former success of Top and Rudkin, one of which is questionable if they had anything to do with.

Top post 👍

Edited 2 February by Chocolate Teapot

[CosbehFox]

4 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

Quick question who is to blame and who loses their job when results on the pitch are not good? the answer is the Manager and quite often his backroom staff 

now in the case of a Director of Football or Sporting Director, their role includes

advising the owner or making the decision to hire & fire managers, set the philosophy and strategy of the club, buy and sell players that have been identified by the recruitment team and managers, manage contract negotiations with existing players and staff, amongst other tasks. 
 

At what stage does Rudkin not take responsibility and accountability for his part in the current financial position, the shitshow regards contract negotiations and the current state of our wage bill and inability to move players on, our relegation from the premier league and his refusal to push for the removal of the poisoned dwarf when it was clear he has downed tools after 2 thrashing’s away to Brighton and Spurs.
 

In any other club or industry he would have gone in the summer if not before. I am amazed that anybody can defend him from that list. Yes we won the league in 2016 and FA Cup in 2021 but that is history, if we can sack Ranieri 9 months after leading us to the title then in the same way Rudkin has to go for the relegation and countless other issues under his watch. 

 

I'd argue it's not good business practice to have someone in position for such a long period of time as well. 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

Just now, CosbehFox said:

I'd argue it's not good business practice to have someone in position for such a long period of time as well. 

And someone who's not accountable for anything.

[ealingfox]

21 minutes ago, Itsthejoeker said:

Spoiler alert, he doesn’t. 
 

None of us know how football clubs are run as much as we all like to pretend. 

 

I was being sarcastic. We know more than enough to make the judgements he was making.

[Claudio Fannieri]

3 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Exactly, people turned on Rodgers quick enough despite delivering success.

But those same Melons are now calling on former success of Top and Rudkin, one of which is questionable if they had anything to do with.

Top post 👍

You called it early doors yesterday that the deal for Sensi wouldn’t happen and you also alluded it was down to Rudkin. I cannot believe how blinkered people are to his accountability in all of what has gone before us and my biggest fear is that he will see off the manager who is doing a bloody good job of undoing the mess. 

[Ric Flair]

19 minutes ago, Babylon said:

And we've been through all of this before, so I don't need to repeat it.

Correct, other than nothing has changed and until it does we will face the same problems. Somethings got to give.

[Finnegan]

26 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Whether he knows he needs to sell before he buys counts for nothing when the person who leads on selling players seemingly struggles to do just that. We've gotten a transfer fee for players we no longer wanted, 4 times in 4 years. That same person is Maresca's direct reporting line and whether Maresca is naive enough to be truly in the dark on the position we found ourselves in January or not, it doesn't change much does it?

 

 

 

I literally just got about 2/3rds of the way through typing out a bit of a rant in a whole new topic and had one of those "wtf am I bothering for?" moments and deleted it. I kinda wish I hadn't.

 

The crux was that I still don't think people quite understand the relationship between Amortisation and FFP and that it really, really isn't simple to "just" sell footballers - ESPECIALLY for a loss.

 

The problem isn't that "Rudkin can't sell players", the problem is that we as a club have signed too many players for too much money that haven't lived up to expectations. Its the amount we buy them for with the risks that we do that then make them so difficult to sell because you need to clear the entire book value of a footballer in that one year that you sell which can cause crippling losses as far as FFP is concerned.

 

We overpaid for, for example, Soumare by so much that literally nobody wants to buy him for enough money that we wouldn't be screwed by our own amortisation if we sell him "too early." And that's ignoring the fact that because we're paying him big old Premier League wages he quite possibly doesn't want a permanent move even if clubs are interested (see Dennis Praet and formerly Yannik Vestergaard.)

 

Now don't get me wrong, as I said earlier, that still means the buck stops with Rudkin but the problem isn't that he can't sell - Don fvcking Draper couldn't sell Bouba Soumare or Dennis Praet for a profit - the problem is that we identified these talents in the first place and signed them for inflated fees well above their market value (also see Islam Slimani, Rachid Ghezzal, Filip Benkovic, Timothy Castagne, Bartosz Kaputska, Adrien Silva and a long list of other flops.)

 

I highly doubt Rudkin personally identified any of these targets, it isn't really his wheelhouse, but he has overseen the recruitment of a procession of extremely middle-of-the-road heads of recruitment since Walsh left and he has been involved in the negotiations of the fees of a lot of these players and he does seem to have a track record of going extremely high with fairly poor negotiations. The best two deals this club have done in the last few decades was the sales of Maguire and Fofana and its my understanding Whelan got involved to directly oversee both of those?

 

So I'm not defending the guy entirely and I'm largely in the camp that if we want to be a world class football club then we need to start acting like one, I've said before that I do actually like our owners' valuation of loyalty and commitment but ultimately you wouldn't find Tony Bloom letting his inadequate mate stick around as the DoF for so long just because he's loyal. But I do think people are expecting water from wine when they think that anyone, and I do mean anyone, is going to easily just sell Souttar, Soumare, Kristiansen, et all.

 

We're fvcking stuck with them for the long haul and people need to get used to it.

 

 

Edited 2 February by Finnegan

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

1 minute ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

You called it early doors yesterday that the deal for Sensi wouldn’t happen and you also alluded it was down to Rudkin. I cannot believe how blinkered people are to his accountability in all of what has gone before us and my biggest fear is that he will see off the manager who is doing a bloody good job of undoing the mess. 

It's staring people right in the face.

 

How many people have the club actually sold for more than 5m in the last 5 years?

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

1 minute ago, Finnegan said:

 

I literally just got about 2/3rds of the way through typing out a bit of a rant in a whole new topic and had one of those "wtf am I bothering for?" moments and deleted it. I kinda wish I hadn't.

 

The crux was that I still don't think people quite understand the relationship between Amortisation and FFP and that it really, really isn't simple to "just" sell footballers - ESPECIALLY for a loss.

 

The problem isn't that "Rudkin can't sell players", the problem is that we as a club have signed too many players for too much money that haven't lived up to expectations. Its the amount we buy them for with the risks that we do that then make them so difficult to sell because you need to clear the entire book value of a footballer in that one year that you sell which can cause crippling losses as far as FFP is concerned.

 

We overpaid for, for example, Soumare by so much that literally nobody wants to buy him for enough money that we wouldn't be screwed by our own amortisation if we sell him "too early." And that's ignoring the fact that because we're paying him big old Premier League wages he quite possibly doesn't want a permanent move even if clubs are interested (see Dennis Praet and formerly Yannik Vestergaard.)

 

Now don't get me wrong, as I said earlier, that still means the buck stops with Rudkin but the problem isn't that he can't sell - Don fvcking Draper couldn't sell Bouba Soumare or Dennis Praet for a profit - the problem is that we identified these talents in the first place and signed them for inflated fees well above their market value (also see Islam Slimani, Rachid Ghezzal, Filip Benkovic, Timothy Castagne, Bartosz Kaputska, Adrien Silva and a long list of other flops.)

 

I highly doubt Rudkin personally identified any of these targets, it isn't really his wheelhouse, but he has overseen the recruitment of a procession of extremely middle-of-the-road heads of recruitment since Walsh left and he has been involved in the negotiations of the fees of a lot of these players and he does seem to have a track record of going extremely high with fairly poor negotiations. The best two deals this club have done in the last few decades was the sales of Maguire and Fofana and its my understanding Whelan got involved to directly oversee both of those?

 

So I'm not defending the guy entirely and I'm largely in the camp that if we want to be a world class football club then we need to start acting like one, I've said before that I do actually like our owners' valuation of loyalty and commitment but ultimately you wouldn't find Tony Bloom letting his inadequate mate stick around as the DoF for so long just because he's loyal.

 

Rudkin is culpable for signing the players we can't sell because we overpaid for them. He negotiates the contracts, it's very simple in this sense.

[Viva]

1 minute ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Rudkin is culpable for signing the players we can't sell because we overpaid for them. He negotiates the contracts, it's very simple in this sense.

Simple also that he must therefore be responsible for the very astute signings we made last summer?

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

1 minute ago, Viva said:

Simple also that he must therefore be responsible for the very astute signings we made last summer?

Yes but one good summer in amongst 12 bad windows doesn't make it all roses.

 

And even then, wheres the value I'm a signing like Coady?

Edited 2 February by Chocolate Teapot

[Uncle Monty]

7 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I literally just got about 2/3rds of the way through typing out a bit of a rant in a whole new topic and had one of those "wtf am I bothering for?" moments and deleted it. I kinda wish I hadn't.

 

The crux was that I still don't think people quite understand the relationship between Amortisation and FFP and that it really, really isn't simple to "just" sell footballers - ESPECIALLY for a loss.

 

The problem isn't that "Rudkin can't sell players", the problem is that we as a club have signed too many players for too much money that haven't lived up to expectations. Its the amount we buy them for with the risks that we do that then make them so difficult to sell because you need to clear the entire book value of a footballer in that one year that you sell which can cause crippling losses as far as FFP is concerned.

 

We overpaid for, for example, Soumare by so much that literally nobody wants to buy him for enough money that we wouldn't be screwed by our own amortisation if we sell him "too early." And that's ignoring the fact that because we're paying him big old Premier League wages he quite possibly doesn't want a permanent move even if clubs are interested (see Dennis Praet and formerly Yannik Vestergaard.)

 

Now don't get me wrong, as I said earlier, that still means the buck stops with Rudkin but the problem isn't that he can't sell - Don fvcking Draper couldn't sell Bouba Soumare or Dennis Praet for a profit - the problem is that we identified these talents in the first place and signed them for inflated fees well above their market value (also see Islam Slimani, Rachid Ghezzal, Filip Benkovic, Timothy Castagne, Bartosz Kaputska, Adrien Silva and a long list of other flops.)

 

I highly doubt Rudkin personally identified any of these targets, it isn't really his wheelhouse, but he has overseen the recruitment of a procession of extremely middle-of-the-road heads of recruitment since Walsh left and he has been involved in the negotiations of the fees of a lot of these players and he does seem to have a track record of going extremely high with fairly poor negotiations. The best two deals this club have done in the last few decades was the sales of Maguire and Fofana and its my understanding Whelan got involved to directly oversee both of those?

 

So I'm not defending the guy entirely and I'm largely in the camp that if we want to be a world class football club then we need to start acting like one, I've said before that I do actually like our owners' valuation of loyalty and commitment but ultimately you wouldn't find Tony Bloom letting his inadequate mate stick around as the DoF for so long just because he's loyal. But I do think people are expecting water from wine when they think that anyone, and I do mean anyone, is going to easily just sell Souttar, Soumare, Kristiansen, et all.

 

We're fvcking stuck with them for the long haul and people need to get used to it.

 

 

Agree with all apart from calling castagne a flop. He was a solid 6/7 out of ten most games. Maybe 5/6 in relegation season.

[Hinckleyfox]

2 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Rudkin is culpable for signing the players we can't sell because we overpaid for them. He negotiates the contracts, it's very simple in this sense.

I'm not sure it is that simple though. I'm with Finnegan that I dont say he's blameless in any way shape or form but I think its naive to think that hes solely at fault. 

If he negotiates too hard and loses out on targets, he's not doing his job because he's not supporting the manager 

If he pays the money because he's assured the player is worth it, he's not doing his job because he's overpaying. 

 

Now within that, lets be honest he should be a better negotiator because it's his job. But somebody somewhere has gone to him and probably said that Soumare is worth every penny we paid for him. Likewise with Slimani, Ghezzal etc etc.

I mean this forum was well on board with most of these signings when we got them - remember the excitment when Musa was signed and was going to be better than the legend that is JV9? 

 

Rudkin has not negotiated properly

The scouts have not done a thorough enough job identifying the targets

The coaches/managers have not got a tune out of the players they were desperate to sign

 

So to think that Rudkin disappears and so do the problems.... it's just not that simple.

[Ric Flair]

Just now, Finnegan said:

 

I literally just got about 2/3rds of the way through typing out a bit of a rant in a whole new topic and had one of those "wtf am I bothering for?" moments and deleted it. I kinda wish I hadn't.

 

The crux was that I still don't think people quite understand the relationship between Amortisation and FFP and that it really, really isn't simple to "just" sell footballers - ESPECIALLY for a loss.

 

The problem isn't that "Rudkin can't sell players", the problem is that we as a club have signed too many players for too much money that haven't lived up to expectations. Its the amount we buy them for with the risks that we do that then make them so difficult to sell because you need to clear the entire book value of a footballer in that one year that you sell which can cause crippling losses as far as FFP is concerned.

 

We overpaid for, for example, Soumare by so much that literally nobody wants to buy him for enough money that we wouldn't be screwed by our own amortisation if we sell him "too early." And that's ignoring the fact that because we're paying him big old Premier League wages he quite possibly doesn't want a permanent move even if clubs are interested (see Dennis Praet and formerly Yannik Vestergaard.)

 

Now don't get me wrong, as I said earlier, that still means the buck stops with Rudkin but the problem isn't that he can't sell - Don fvcking Draper couldn't sell Bouba Soumare or Dennis Praet for a profit - the problem is that we identified these talents in the first place and signed them for inflated fees well above their market value (also see Islam Slimani, Rachid Ghezzal, Filip Benkovic, Timothy Castagne, Bartosz Kaputska, Adrien Silva and a long list of other flops.)

 

I highly doubt Rudkin personally identified any of these targets, it isn't really his wheelhouse, but he has overseen the recruitment of a procession of extremely middle-of-the-road heads of recruitment since Walsh left and he has been involved in the negotiations of the fees of a lot of these players and he does seem to have a track record of going extremely high with fairly poor negotiations. The best two deals this club have done in the last few decades was the sales of Maguire and Fofana and its my understanding Whelan got involved to directly oversee both of those?

 

So I'm not defending the guy entirely and I'm largely in the camp that if we want to be a world class football club then we need to start acting like one, I've said before that I do actually like our owners' valuation of loyalty and commitment but ultimately you wouldn't find Tony Bloom letting his inadequate mate stick around as the DoF for so long just because he's loyal.

 

I know all of this, I am one of the most boring posters for quoting amortisation and the amounts we need to sell for and the practices of FFP.

 

But this doesn't alleviate how we overcome this. If we don't have the financial flexibility to take a loss on players then how can we create a model that enables the whole squad progression not to grind to a halt year in year out due to not being able to sell players. Every club has flops, every club has players they want to move on that may not have even flopped, what makes it harder to get rid of both types of players is a few reasons. We seem to have all of them - 1) our wage structure grew much higher than those around us who'd be fishing in the same pond 2) we pay transfer fees for players over the odds of others and 3) we have a poor track record of selling players we are happy to let go.

 

Plenty of people defend the club that we nearly sold this player and nearly sold that player etc but the facts are we've sold Ghezzal, Diabete, Schmeichel and Castagne in the last 4 years, who we no longer wanted for a transfer fee.

 

We've had bids for Soumare, Vestergaard, Iversen, Praet and several others that we know of and all fell through for whatever reasons. Happy to accept it takes two to tango but all of them doing so makes me less sympathetic.

 

I see scant evidence we are changing enough to get us put of this mess long term. We've evidently overspent last summer, which is understandable in isolation due to the need to get straight back up but it still leaves us no nearer to a new strategy and we have the same board and director in charge of it all.

 

We are set for the majority of the squad to return to their salaries from last season and what then?

 

Time for a change of ownership.

 

 

[Finnegan]

2 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Rudkin is culpable for signing the players we can't sell because we overpaid for them. He negotiates the contracts, it's very simple in this sense.

 

Yep no question. But we could hire Michael Zorc, Txiki Begiristain, Monchi and Ralf Rangnick tomorrow and they still wouldn't be able to sell Bouba Soumare for a profit or clear out all of our dead wood without getting the club screwed by FFP / Profit & Sustain.

 

It might sound like splitting hairs to say the problem is what we paid not that we can't sell but in terms of setting people's expectations and understanding where we are as a club it's an important distinction.

 

The problem could actually be resolved already (to a point*) in that actually maybe Glover and Maresca are the dream team and we'll be fine now moving forward for the foreseeable future, no more crap targets identified, no more terrible coaching, only upwards. But we're still going to have to deal with yesterday's problems for another few years because squad building happens over the span of contracts, not just in overnight.

 

 

*again, I accept that long term Rudkin very well may need to go. If his "talent" for hiring is so inconsistent then who's to say the next manager and the next head of recruitment won't be another Rodgers and Congerton? But he isn't a Zorc or Begiristain is he? And I don't just mean in terms of talent I mean in terms of vision. Elite, high-level DoFs have their own clear sporting vision for a club and they take it that way. Just strikes me that Rudkin is more about trying to hire the right people, delegate what he can and hope he got the right appointment. But then that is me just speculating from what we've seen.

 

[Viva]

5 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Yes but one good summer in amongst 12 bad windows doesn't make it all roses.

 

And even then, wheres the value I'm a signing like Coady?

People love to name Coady, but don't mention the other good buys. We had a superb window last summer.

[bovril]

12 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Now don't get me wrong, as I said earlier, that still means the buck stops with Rudkin but the problem isn't that he can't sell - Don fvcking Draper couldn't sell Bouba Soumare or Dennis Praet for a profit - the problem is that we identified these talents in the first place and signed them for inflated fees well above their market value (also see Islam Slimani, Rachid Ghezzal, Filip Benkovic, Timothy Castagne, Bartosz Kaputska, Adrien Silva and a long list of other flops.)

 

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Correct, other than nothing has changed and until it does we will face the same problems. Somethings got to give.

And the problems aren't all Rudkin, without wanting to go over the whole thing again... 

 

We accepted bids on players (Sourmare and Vesty) that the players turned down. That's using sources you used to state we'd turned other bids down. 

The FFP rules were changed and it became clear we needed to cut back at least 20% on wages, it's very hard to negotiate new contracts based on that. 

It's also hard to sell players or give them away if you don't have the budget to buy someone of equal ability, because it's better to keep them. 

Loans can be more lucrative that sales if the deals are right, or you are only getting seriously low offers. 

The wider world has changed; players have started running down contracts to take back power. 

 

Things aren't going to change until we've got a grip of the finances, which i'd like to think happens in the summer if we get promoted. Because we lose a lot of dead wood, we have increased revenue, and we should be able to get the wages right down in terms of % of revenue. There was no giant issue back when we were getting money for Musa, Iborra, Zieler, Lawrence, Moore, De Laet, Schlupp, Hernandez etc. So what's changed, circumstances as listed? Chairman? Or do you seriously think it's all down to Rudkin?

[lcfcbluearmy]

29 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

Irrespective of whether Enzo was or was not aware of the transfer funding situation, the Dufkin era needs terminating.  His performance over the past 2.5 10 years is very underwhelming.  For us to move forward we need fresh ideas and a new direction off the pitch. 

Fixed it

[CosbehFox]

7 minutes ago, Hinckleyfox said:

I'm not sure it is that simple though. I'm with Finnegan that I dont say he's blameless in any way shape or form but I think its naive to think that hes solely at fault. 

If he negotiates too hard and loses out on targets, he's not doing his job because he's not supporting the manager 

If he pays the money because he's assured the player is worth it, he's not doing his job because he's overpaying. 

 

Now within that, lets be honest he should be a better negotiator because it's his job. But somebody somewhere has gone to him and probably said that Soumare is worth every penny we paid for him. Likewise with Slimani, Ghezzal etc etc.

I mean this forum was well on board with most of these signings when we got them - remember the excitment when Musa was signed and was going to be better than the legend that is JV9? 

 

Rudkin has not negotiated properly

The scouts have not done a thorough enough job identifying the targets

The coaches/managers have not got a tune out of the players they were desperate to sign

 

So to think that Rudkin disappears and so do the problems.... it's just not that simple.

But it's under his umbrella - his role is effectively quality control. He should be the individual setting the agenda, the ideology and the personality. If it's not his failure, it should be pretty who clear who has failed. The fact his role is so fudged - which includes interests in Leuven and Horse Racing creates this void of leadership. Fundamentally alongside the errors, that's what is badly missing. 

Edited 2 February by CosbehFox

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

2 minutes ago, Viva said:

People love to name Coady, but don't mention the other good buys. We had a superb window last summer.

Yunus? Not sure.

Casadei? Not sure.

Cannon? Too early to say.

 

It was good but when your budget is double everyone else's its not that hard