Rudkin

[Viva]

4 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Do you think Rodgers should still be in charge ?

No I don't. There would obviously have been a case to get rid of Rudkin too. However, he stayed and we did a good job last season with player and managerial recruitments. 

 

It just seems ridiculous for people to pin the blame on Rudkin all the time and for people to make out like he is clueless. Ignoring the fact the he has been Director of Football over our most successful period. 

 

[Jobyfox]

31 minutes ago, Viva said:

No I don't. There would obviously have been a case to get rid of Rudkin too. However, he stayed and we did a good job last season with player and managerial recruitments. 

 

It just seems ridiculous for people to pin the blame on Rudkin all the time and for people to make out like he is clueless. Ignoring the fact the he has been Director of Football over our most successful period. 

 

I think when we were getting all that success he and others were rightly taking the plaudits. It’s collective responsibility and rarely down to one individual.

 

That principle also applies when things go wrong. Many people were expecting a root and branch review, after the relegation season, but we didn’t see one. Instead all the hierarchy stayed in post and only Rodgers was sacked. Brendan was correctly blamed for the failures in the relegation season, but he cannot be blamed solely for the poor recruitment and strategies that led to our inability to sign players and the pending points deduction.

 

The problem now is that the inactivity at board level has left people needing a scapegoat. Many have decided that Rudkin is that man and he has emerged as some sort of pantomime villain. Even if those accusing him have no real knowledge of the inner workings of the club and the real root cause of our recent failures. 

Edited 13 June by Jobyfox

[Stadt]

37 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Did the FA Cup happen 10 years ago? Did promotion happen 10 years ago?

 

I stand by what I always say, we have no idea who knew what, who said what, or who signed what off. Clearly, in his position, he's going to get a percentage of the blame, but so is everyone. So either just apportion blame to all, or choose the person at the top. 

 

There are just things that nobody alive is going to get right all the time. Yeah we signed some duds, which comes from poor scouting. Some of that is just poor scout judgement, some of that is appointing the wrong person. But we've had a high turn around in scouting, generally because we've been good at it, so the staff have been poached. Eventually, we'll get it wrong. 

 

 

89.5m loss and a record points deduction on the cards - previous achievements mean very little when the quality of decision making behind the scenes has been trending negatively for years.
 

I think they’re all useless and would have everybody replaced but then your usual routine is “we don’t know who does what” so the obfuscation starts.

 

The most common point of failure are responsibilities under Rudkin’s remit.

 

Top isn’t going anywhere so the lowest hanging fruit is replacing the director of football for a better one.

 

Managers go stale, CEOs go stale so naturally DoFs can too. 

 

If we binned him off and appointed a smart, up and coming DoF and gave them the autonomy to build something we’d be way better off on the long run.

[Stadt]

47 minutes ago, Viva said:

I wouldn't say virtually two years sat in the top 4 and an FA Cup win were disasters. The best few years in our club's history, but ok let's ignore all that then and just focus on the couple of years after the FA Cup win. 

Are the impending points deductions a good indicator of Rudkin’s ability as key cog in the running of the football club? 
 

[Babylon]

32 minutes ago, Stadt said:

89.5m loss and a record points deduction on the cards - previous achievements mean very little when the quality of decision making behind the scenes has been trending negatively for years.

You actually think that one person, not on the board, not signing the cheques, is going to run up a £90m loss without the people above him signing it all off, or not even instructing him to make decisions that cause it. Utterly nonsensical. 

 

32 minutes ago, Stadt said:

I think they’re all useless and would have everybody replaced but then your usual routine is “we don’t know who does what” so the obfuscation starts.

 

The most common point of failure are responsibilities under Rudkin’s remit.

You don't know what his remit is; anyone saying oh well, x, y and z are his remit is doing nothing but guessing. You also don't know if he's been overruled once, twice or a hundred times by those above him. You might not like it, but it's reality. I'd shed no tears if he went, there has probably been enough over the years for him to lose his position. But the fact he doesn't means there is probably quite a bit more to it than we realise. 

 

I fear you don't grasp that much of our success since KP arrived has been based on risks. I'm sure you enjoyed it when it went well. 

 

32 minutes ago, Stadt said:

If we binned him off and appointed a smart, up and coming DoF and gave them the autonomy to build something we’d be way better off on the long run.

You know that for a fact? If you want the club to play by the rules, don't push the boat out to get much further than what clubs our size normally do, we'll just be Palace. Bobbing around in midtable until the inevitable happens, and it will happen. Because no matter who you appoint, they will at some point hire the wrong head of recruitment or the wrong manager, and it will all go down the pan. There is a very good reason no club without vast sums of money has ever sustained it. 

 

 

Edited 13 June by Babylon

[Viva]

7 minutes ago, Stadt said:

Are the impending points deductions a good indicator of Rudkin’s ability as key cog in the running of the football club? 
 

They are an indicator that we overstretched on wages when trying to break into the top 4. Obviously Rudkin would have been a part of the decision making to do this. It did however help us to win an FA Cup and have a good crack at the top 4, because we would have sold Vardy and Schmeichel  for example, way before this if we were staying totally within our means. £130-140k a week wages would not have been affordable. 

 

With some good decision making last summer, we are back as a Premier League team. Let's see how we do from now.

 

 

 

 

[Tommy G]

19 minutes ago, Babylon said:

You actually think that one personon the board, not signing the cheques, is going to run up a £90m loss without the people above him signing it all off, or at a club, not  even instructing him to make decisions that cause it. Utterly nonsensical. 

 

You don't know what his remit is; anyone saying oh well, x, y and z are his remit is doing nothing but guessing. You also don't know if he's been overruled once, twice or a hundred times by those above him. You might not like it, but it's reality. I'd shed no tears if he went, there has probably been enough over the years for him to lose his position. But the fact he doesn't means there is probably quite a bit more to it than we realise. 

 

I fear you don't grasp that much of our success since KP arrived has been based on risks. I'm sure you enjoyed it when it went well. 

 

You know that for a fact? If you want the club to play by the rules, don't push the boat out to get much further than what clubs our size normally do, we'll just be Palace. Bobbing around in midtable until the inevitable happens, and it will happen. Because no matter who you appoint, they will at some point hire the wrong head of recruitment or the wrong manager, and it will all go down the pan. There is a very good reason no club without vast sums of money has ever sustained it. 

 

 

I don't know why you bother replying, he's spent too much time on football manager 

 

It's very easy to sit there and type what you would of done with hindsight, anyone can do that, and to pin it all on DofF is just ridiculous and speaks volumes about not understanding how the hierarchy of a business or a football club operates. 

[Stadt]

27 minutes ago, Babylon said:

You actually think that one person, not on the board, not signing the cheques, is going to run up a £90m loss without the people above him signing it all off, or not even instructing him to make decisions that cause it. Utterly nonsensical. 

 

You don't know what his remit is; anyone saying oh well, x, y and z are his remit is doing nothing but guessing. You also don't know if he's been overruled once, twice or a hundred times by those above him. You might not like it, but it's reality. I'd shed no tears if he went, there has probably been enough over the years for him to lose his position. But the fact he doesn't means there is probably quite a bit more to it than we realise. 

 

I fear you don't grasp that much of our success since KP arrived has been based on risks. I'm sure you enjoyed it when it went well. 

 

You know that for a fact? If you want the club to play by the rules, don't push the boat out to get much further than what clubs our size normally do, we'll just be Palace. Bobbing around in midtable until the inevitable happens, and it will happen. Because no matter who you appoint, they will at some point hire the wrong head of recruitment or the wrong manager, and it will all go down the pan. There is a very good reason no club without vast sums of money has ever sustained it. 

 

 

When did I say it's all him, I very clearly said I want them all gone.

 

Contracts are his remit, as confirmed by multiple players. Vardy, Evans, Huth etc have all said so in the pasts. Contract management is one of the few aspects that we know - for certain - Rudkin handles. We've had more than £100m+ worth of players leave on frees recently. I can't imagine the board (of which Rudkin is obviously a member) wanted that to happen.

 

If he's continually overruled (you don't know that, you're speculating) then they don't trust him so he should be replaced or they should change internal processes.

 

There's always going to be more to it than we realise - it's hardly a defence, it's just an appeal to inertia because we'll never know.

 

Of course there's risks, obviously I grasp that. We took needless risks through haphazard spending because our squad management was so bad rather than we tried to send our way through the glass ceiling. Take Praet, Ward and Mandy as examples - we overpaid and never shifted them for a fee. They were not calculated risks it was just lazy spending and we never rectified our initial mistakes. Aha, somebody has to want these players! True, but we can't shift them because we overpay, that comes back to bad contract management and as we've established that's on Rudkin.

 

I don't know that for a fact (how could I?) but if we did replace him with a good DoF I'm 99% sure we'd be better off.

 

The look-it's-complicated-it's-not-just-Rudkin line works if people want an overhaul elsewhere but that bandwagon seemingly wants nothing to happen instead.

 

 

 

 

[jamesmilner]

56 minutes ago, Jobyfox said:

I think when we were getting all that success he and others were rightly taking the plaudits. It’s collective responsibility and rarely down to one individual.

 

 

Please explain how you know  'he and others were rightly taking the plaudits' and what his reaction was ? Do you think he should have came out and said 'ohhhh, stop it' ? 

[Stadt]

15 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

I don't know why you bother replying, he's spent too much time on football manager 

 

It's very easy to sit there and type what you would of done with hindsight, anyone can do that, and to pin it all on DofF is just ridiculous and speaks volumes about not understanding how the hierarchy of a business or a football club operates. 

We've made lots of mistakes and even on here, just a bunch of forum posters have been proved right - it's not all the benefit of hindsight.

 

There's been lots of mistakes at the club as evidenced by the worst PL relation ever and massive subsequent losses. Lots of people are culpable but Rudkin is literally the director of football and the football dept kept f ucking up.

 

[Babylon]

3 minutes ago, Stadt said:

Contracts are his remit, as confirmed by multiple players. Vardy, Evans, Huth etc have all said so in the pasts.

Some parts yes, we've also been told previously that the players were lined up by the head of recruitment and they did much of the leg work (including contracts) before handing it off to the DOF. They will give an outline of worth to him, otherwise how is he meant to know what they value the player at, they are meant to be the experts. 

 

3 minutes ago, Stadt said:

We've had more than £100m+ worth of players leave on frees recently. I can't imagine the board (of which Rudkin is obviously a member) wanted that to happen.

There are numerous things at play. Firstly, you can't make a player sign a contract, secondly, you can't make other clubs bid for players. Many players have started running down contracts around Europe, we'll see it more and more as they are all so rich now, they don't worry about an injury, and they are taking power back. Secondly, FFP rules changed and we had to adapt. This meant a limited budget, which meant little to buy replacements. Yeah we could let players go cheap, but then if you don't have the money to get a better player in, then sometimes you are better off keeping the player. 

 

3 minutes ago, Stadt said:

If he's continually overruled (you don't know that, you're speculating) then they don't trust him so he should be replaced or they should change internal processes.

That's just silly; I've had disagreements with bosses wherever I've been, it doesn't mean people need replacing; it's just differing opinions at times. There are also bigger things at play, yeah I'm sure if his remit was just book balancing and nothing else, he'd have not wanted Seagrave, not wanting expansions etc. As that money all comes out of the clubs spending power. 

 

3 minutes ago, Stadt said:

Of course there's risks, obviously I grasp that. We took needless risks through haphazard spending because our squad management was so bad rather than we tried to send our way through the glass ceiling. Take Praet, Ward and Mandy as examples - we overpaid and never shifted them for a fee. They were not calculated risks it was just lazy spending and we never rectified our initial mistakes. Aha, somebody has to want these players! True, but we can't shift them because we overpay, that comes back to bad contract management and as we've established that's on Rudkin.

 

Spending money to try and compete is the risk, the mistake was made during the scouting. Do you think Rudkin sits there and randomly decides what to pay, or do you think the scouts hand up a detailed scout report with potential valuations, wages, etc? If you want to say he made a huge mistake in appointing Rodger's man, yes I would agree. We all took a few seconds to look into him and it screamed disaster.

 

3 minutes ago, Stadt said:

The look-it's-complicated-it's-not-just-Rudkin line works if people want an overhaul elsewhere but that bandwagon seemingly wants nothing to happen instead.

There are no many things at play, of course people want things to change but I want the people with ALL the information to make that call. Not the people on here with pitchforks, who just ignore so much stuff. From Covid, to FFP changes and 101 other things. 

 

These people have been around huge companies for much of their lives, if there were obvious black and white issues I'm sure there would be action. But there will be so many shades of gray, where x persons decision, impacts y persons decision, x event impacts y event. 

[Daggers]

You know what would solve all this conjecture and wrangling?

 

IF THE FVCKING CLUB FVCKING SPOKE TO US. 

 

Rudkin, Big Sue, Top - silence. All the fvcking time. And that he can take responsibility for. 
 

Communication started poorly when they took over and has sunk to a league-leading worst. 

[themightyfin]

11 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Some parts yes, we've also been told previously that the players were lined up by the head of recruitment and they did much of the leg work (including contracts) before handing it off to the DOF. They will give an outline of worth to him, otherwise how is he meant to know what they value the player at, they are meant to be the experts. 

 

There are numerous things at play. Firstly, you can't make a player sign a contract, secondly, you can't make other clubs bid for players. Many players have started running down contracts around Europe, we'll see it more and more as they are all so rich now, they don't worry about an injury, and they are taking power back. Secondly, FFP rules changed and we had to adapt. This meant a limited budget, which meant little to buy replacements. Yeah we could let players go cheap, but then if you don't have the money to get a better player in, then sometimes you are better off keeping the player. 

 

That's just silly; I've had disagreements with bosses wherever I've been, it doesn't mean people need replacing; it's just differing opinions at times. There are also bigger things at play, yeah I'm sure if his remit was just book balancing and nothing else, he'd have not wanted Seagrave, not wanting expansions etc. As that money all comes out of the clubs spending power. 

 

Spending money to try and compete is the risk, the mistake was made during the scouting. Do you think Rudkin sits there and randomly decides what to pay, or do you think the scouts hand up a detailed scout report with potential valuations, wages, etc? If you want to say he made a huge mistake in appointing Rodger's man, yes I would agree. We all took a few seconds to look into him and it screamed disaster.

 

There are no many things at play, of course people want things to change but I want the people with ALL the information to make that call. Not the people on here with pitchforks, who just ignore so much stuff. From Covid, to FFP changes and 101 other things. 

 

These people have been around huge companies for much of their lives, if there were obvious black and white issues I'm sure there would be action. But there will be so many shades of gray, where x persons decision, impacts y persons decision, x event impacts y event. 

Possibly the most sensible post I have ever read on Foxestalk. 

 

Well said Sir 👏 

[mozartfox]

So basically Rudkin is to blame for nothing.  I wonder who it is that has screwed us then?

 

If it is Filbert,  I want him gon.

[Dames]

Defending the people that have saddled us with huge losses, years of points deductions and transfer restrictions really isnt a flex.

 

We need every single member of the board gone and a competent ownership. 

[Dahnsouff]

Nice post @Babylon  just a little light on the outrage to become a best seller I fear.

[Jobyfox]

2 hours ago, Stadt said:

89.5m loss and a record points deduction on the cards - previous achievements mean very little when the quality of decision making behind the scenes has been trending negatively for years.
 

I think they’re all useless and would have everybody replaced but then your usual routine is “we don’t know who does what” so the obfuscation starts.

 

The most common point of failure are responsibilities under Rudkin’s remit.

 

Top isn’t going anywhere so the lowest hanging fruit is replacing the director of football for a better one.

 

Managers go stale, CEOs go stale so naturally DoFs can too. 

 

If we binned him off and appointed a smart, up and coming DoF and gave them the autonomy to build something we’d be way better off on the long run.

To be clear I'm not advocating for Rudkin. I really would have expected more change after the relegation season for the reasons you've mentioned. The DOF seems an obvious choice of someone you'd replace and I'm surprised that he was kept in post. 

 

I was simply pointing out that, in the absence of making any strategic change of direction, fans are looking around for someone to blame. Rudkin is now being called out not only for the financial mismanagement, but also for almost every decision the club takes that doesn't look good in hindsight. He's even pilloried for not smiling at the right time. 

 

I don't blame the fans. I blame the club whose inaction has led to Rudkin becoming a figure of hate for a frustrated fanbase.  

 

 

 

 

 

[StriderHiryu]

1 hour ago, Daggers said:

You know what would solve all this conjecture and wrangling?

 

IF THE FVCKING CLUB FVCKING SPOKE TO US. 

 

Rudkin, Big Sue, Top - silence. All the fvcking time. And that he can take responsibility for. 
 

Communication started poorly when they took over and has sunk to a league-leading worst. 

It's funny that this is your profile image, because maybe that's the reason why they don't commuicate with us:

 

LEICESTER CITY ILLUMINATI CONFIRMED!

[Jobyfox]

1 hour ago, jamesmilner said:

 

 

Please explain how you know  'he and others were rightly taking the plaudits' and what his reaction was ? Do you think he should have came out and said 'ohhhh, stop it' ? 

My point was around collective responsibility. When things are going really well everyone can take credit - from the DOF to the janitor. The converse, however, is true when things are going badly wrong. Whether it's CE, DOF or whomever. I'd have expected more changes as our approach in recent years has clearly been wrong in ways that are beyond the remit of just the first team coach. 

 

 

[jamesmilner]

1 hour ago, Jobyfox said:

My point was around collective responsibility. When things are going really well everyone can take credit - from the DOF to the janitor. The converse, however, is true when things are going badly wrong. Whether it's CE, DOF or whomever. I'd have expected more changes as our approach in recent years has clearly been wrong in ways that are beyond the remit of just the first team coach. 

 

 

Your point was about taking plaudits , which doesn't concern Rudkin one bit . 

[Ric Flair]

6 hours ago, Babylon said:

Partly, solely no.  

 

There is a board, a CEO, a Chairman, a Vice-Chairman, a Finance Director, teams of accountants etc. All involved in knowing the rules in front of us, signing off budgets, spending, and signings, wages etc. Do you beleive for one moment that discussions have not been had, that they've not all seen the potential numbers?

 

Do people really think Rudkin kicks open the doors to the boardroom, gives them a wink and says, "Trust me, guys, all in hand",... and then doesn't get sacked for it?

 

Or is it far more probable that he's not been sacked because they are all well aware that they signed off whatever finances were on the table.

And yet there's been zero changes in any of these positions, bar Finance Director who was poached by Newcastle. It's unthinkable that such failures have been left largely ignored from a personnel perspective. Probably all blaming each other and all falling for it.

 

There's a common ideology that in modern football an elite director of football is one of the most important positions within the club, hence why there's such a clamour by clubs to keep recruiting until they get the right one. Some of our fans wrap up the mystique of the responsibilities ours might or might not have as some sort of excuse for the comedy show continuing.

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, mozartfox said:

So basically Rudkin is to blame for nothing.  I wonder who it is that has screwed us then?

 

If it is Filbert,  I want him gon.

Has anyone said that? I very much doubt anyone escapes a proportion of the blame.

 

But let’s say he sits down with the board and presents a preseason outline of budgets. Best case, likely, worst case.

 

If the board say don’t worry about worst case, getting relegated is so improbable. What we really want is to compete at the top so let’s focus on the top end spend. 
 

Do you blame him or the people in charge if we then overspend gigantically?

 

I’d much rather focus on the stuff like allowing Rodgers to appoint his own head scout. Which I think is far more likely to be down to him. 
 

That one problem then snowballs, poor signings, overpaying, no money when we need it etc. One bad decision can then spiral into many bad decisions. But he could possibly have just made one very bad decision, and his argument would be, we needed him to get Rodgers and he provided an FA cup and two top 5 finishes. So his bosses will weigh that up. 
 

I think this summer will answer a lot of questions. We either try and rein it in massively, selling players, buying nobody and just taking the money and getting the ship right. Or Top and KP will roll the dice again and a lot of it we will know is down to their appetite for risk. 

 

 

 

 

[Babylon]

3 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

And yet there's been zero changes in any of these positions, bar Finance Director who was poached by Newcastle. It's unthinkable that such failures have been left largely ignored from a personnel perspective. Probably all blaming each other and all falling for it.

 

There's a common ideology that in modern football an elite director of football is one of the most important positions within the club, hence why there's such a clamour by clubs to keep recruiting until they get the right one. Some of our fans wrap up the mystique of the responsibilities ours might or might not have as some sort of excuse for the comedy show continuing.

Or they have all acknowledged their part in it, or they are just doing what that are directed. Or they all know the reality is a perfect storm of issues not caused by any one single person. 
 

At one point we were flying, had loads of bankable assets and all looked good. I think we all probably thought that if it went wrong we have more than enough players to be able to cash in.

 

What we probably didn’t envisage is several players wanting to run down contracts (Soyuncu, Tielemans). Injuries completely wrecking lots of our most saleable assets (Ndidi, Maddison, Ricardo, even Justin). On top of that almost all of our singings flopping when we had a such high hit rate previously. Injuries to players which meant having to buy when I doubt we wanted to. 
 

You can break down loads of things individually and see how they impacted the club and contributed.

 

From Covid and us being one of the first clubs to say we aren’t taking government support when lots of others far bigger decided they were going to applauded, but ultimately putting a bigger hole in the finances. All the other losses involved in it, which contributed to massive losses. How it impacted KP, financially and also what time they could focus on the club. 
 

How FFP changes at UEFA then impacted our ability to spend if we ever wanted to play in Europe and the prospect of the prem following ( they always do). How that meant we pulled back the spending.

 

How backing Rodgers with a huge budget and the subsequent flopping of them blew up in our faces. I can’t even be bothered to start breaking down all the knock ons.

 

There are just so many little bits that all just came together to create a shit storm. Some mistakes, some not, some bad luck, Some bad timing, some likely from the Top, some likely form Rudkin, most we’ll never know. 

 

I’d like to think there has been a proper analysis of it all internally. Why would you not want that as a business owner. 

 

[Jobyfox]

39 minutes ago, jamesmilner said:

Your point was about taking plaudits , which doesn't concern Rudkin one bit . 

Well if you don’t get it now … I’ll leave it with you 

[Chocolate Teapot]

8 hours ago, themightyfin said:

 

Not entirely true.

He's Been in the role over about 10 years or more , they just changed the job title last year. Previously it was chief finance controller or something similar if I remember correctly. 

No. Simon Capper left for Newcastle. He worked for Capper.