Statues

[Nalis]

One of Vardy obviously

One of Morgan and Ranieri with the premier league

 

 

[Nalis]

Also, probably one for the unpopular opinion thread, but the Vichai one before any past or present player or manager never sat comfortably with me, despite the what he's done for us and the tragic circumstances of the helicopter crash.

[SK3Blue]

2 statues are ready made. 

[Jimbo]

12 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Also, probably one for the unpopular opinion thread, but the Vichai one before any past or present player or manager never sat comfortably with me, despite the what he's done for us and the tragic circumstances of the helicopter crash.

Who, in your opinion, achieved more and is more deserving of of statue? 

[Sampson]

39 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

Who, in your opinion, achieved more and is more deserving of of statue? 

Vardy unquestionably.

 

I mean Schmeichel, Morgan, Albrighton and Fuchs objectively all achieved more too.

 

I agree with Nalis, I get the tragic circumstances around his death swung it. But it makes me a bit uncomfortable we have a statue of him before any of the players 

Edited 16 July 2023 by Sampson

[Jimbo]

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

Vardy unquestionably.

 

I mean Schmeichel, Morgan, Albrighton and Fuchs objectively all achieved more too.

 

I agree with Nalis, I get the tragic circumstances around his death swung it. But it makes me a bit uncomfortable we have a statue of him before any of the players 

All players that were signed because of his investment in the team 

[Sampson]

18 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

All players that were signed because of his investment in the team 

Disagree.

Pearson had brought in the scouting and sports science network which scouted and bought them 2 years before Vichai became chairman and none of those players were particularly big, expensive investments to the point where they couldn't have come in beforehand. Debatably Fuchs, but not really any reason we wouldn't have signed the other 4 under another chairman, given that it was just the same scouting and sports science team from before Vichai was chairman.

I mean, we were already spending £1mil+ on players like Richie Wellens and Paul Gallagher under Mandaric and Pearson, don't think that Morgan, Schmeichel or Vardy were really much bigger signings in terms of investment and it was the same scouting team. Neither were the likes of Mahrez or Drinkwater either.

And it's not like we went crazy with money once we got promoted either. The reason winning the title was such a shock because our team was so cheap, the likes of Albrighton, Huth, Okazaki and an ageing Fuchs were pretty standard signings for a side expecting to battle relegation and Albrighton and Huth were considered cast outs by mid-table/bottom half PL sides. 

I'm not saying he didn't invest, but the amount of money he invested was nowhere near what it usually takes to be right up there, it was our scouting and sports science network that were the best in the country if not Europe for several years and who made the most of the comparatively little funds we could spend to those other clubs at the top, which won us the league above the actual amount of investment. And they were already in place before he became chairman.

Edited 16 July 2023 by Sampson

[Jimbo]

2 hours ago, Sampson said:

Disagree.

Pearson had brought in the scouting and sports science network which scouted and bought them 2 years before Vichai became chairman and none of those players were particularly big, expensive investments to the point where they couldn't have come in beforehand. Debatably Fuchs, but not really any reason we wouldn't have signed the other 4 under another chairman, given that it was just the same scouting and sports science team from before Vichai was chairman.

I mean, we were already spending £1mil+ on players like Richie Wellens and Paul Gallagher under Mandaric and Pearson, don't think that Morgan, Schmeichel or Vardy were really much bigger signings in terms of investment and it was the same scouting team. Neither were the likes of Mahrez or Drinkwater either.

And it's not like we went crazy with money once we got promoted either. The reason winning the title was such a shock because our team was so cheap, the likes of Albrighton, Huth, Okazaki and an ageing Fuchs were pretty standard signings for a side expecting to battle relegation and Albrighton and Huth were considered cast outs by mid-table/bottom half PL sides. 

I'm not saying he didn't invest, but the amount of money he invested was nowhere near what it usually takes to be right up there, it was our scouting and sports science network that were the best in the country if not Europe for several years and who made the most of the comparatively little funds we could spend to those other clubs at the top, which won us the league above the actual amount of investment. And they were already in place before he became chairman.

Considering Schmeichel was most certainly not signed by Pearson and was the others were all signed in Pearsons 2nd stint as manager, well after vichai took over the club, I gave up reading the rest of your post

[Sampson]

27 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

Considering Schmeichel was most certainly not signed by Pearson and was the others were all signed in Pearsons 2nd stint as manager, well after vichai took over the club, I gave up reading the rest of your post

Huh? Why comment then? I mean, yeah, it’s clear you didn’t read my post because I never claimed that Pearson signed all of those players.
 

You’ve (the cynic in me thinks deliberately) misinterpreted my point.
 

I said the scouting team and sports science which Pearson brought into the club’s infrastructure in 2009 after Vichai took over and Pearson both left and came back scouted and recommended signing them. The entire staff wasn’t overhauled in that 18 months Pearson was at Hull, the structure was largely kept the same.

 

I get people have romance around Vichai but the idea that he was more important than the players or back room staff to us winning things kind of implies that it was money and his investment that won us the league and FA Cup and that we bought the league like Jack Walker, Abramovich or Shiekh Monsour did, which obviously wasn’t the case. 
 

Vichai invested less than people like Randy Lerner or Bill Kenwright did, both of whom ended up being derided. The difference between us and other clubs like that was our incredible infrastructure and back room staff in terms of our scouting and sports science teams which were already in place before Vichai took over, and probably the best in Europe for several years until Rodgers took them apart. In fact, Vichai’s biggest and most notable investment was in the training ground which has arguably become a bit of an albatross and diminished the dressing room atmosphere.

 

That’s not to say I don’t think Vichai wasn’t a great chairman for us, he was. But people have gone a bit over the top with him because of the tragedy of his death. The likes of Vardy, Schmeichel, Mahrez, Morgan (well the entire regular starting XI really, and I’m still not convinced we’d have won the league without important goals by Leo Ulloa or Nathan Dyer either), Pearson, Ranieri, Steve Walsh, David Mills etc. were all more instrumental in us winning the league and FA Cup. Vichai didn’t comparatively over-invest in us compared to other clubs, but our back room staff and players were better than other clubs who we were financially competing with and even those we couldn’t financially compete with.

Edited 16 July 2023 by Sampson

[Jimbo]

46 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Huh? Why comment then? I mean, yeah, it’s clear you didn’t read my post because I never claimed that Pearson signed all of those players.
 

You’ve (the cynic in me thinks deliberately) misinterpreted my point.
 

I said the scouting team and sports science which Pearson brought into the club’s infrastructure in 2009 after Vichai took over and Pearson both left and came back scouted and recommended signing them. The entire staff wasn’t overhauled in that 18 months Pearson was at Hull, the structure was largely kept the same.

 

I get people have romance around Vichai but the idea that he was more important than the players or back room staff to us winning things kind of implies that it was money and his investment that won us the league and FA Cup and that we bought the league like Jack Walker, Abramovich or Shiekh Monsour did, which obviously wasn’t the case. 
 

Vichai invested less than people like Randy Lerner or Bill Kenwright did, both of whom ended up being derided. The difference between us and other clubs like that was our incredible infrastructure and back room staff in terms of our scouting and sports science teams which were already in place before Vichai took over, and probably the best in Europe for several years until Rodgers took them apart. In fact, Vichai’s biggest and most notable investment was in the training ground which has arguably become a bit of an albatross and diminished the dressing room atmosphere.

 

That’s not to say I don’t think Vichai wasn’t a great chairman for us, he was. But people have gone a bit over the top with him because of the tragedy of his death. The likes of Vardy, Schmeichel, Mahrez, Morgan (well the entire regular starting XI really, and I’m still not convinced we’d have won the league without important goals by Leo Ulloa or Nathan Dyer either), Pearson, Ranieri, Steve Walsh, David Mills etc. were all more instrumental in us winning the league and FA Cup. Vichai didn’t comparatively over-invest in us compared to other clubs, but our back room staff and players were better than other clubs who we were financially competing with and even those we couldn’t financially compete with.

But what about what he did for the city outside of the football club? You seem to be forgetting that.

 

Plus all the little things that other clubs didn't and still have have? The fan involvement, the free drinks and cakes etc the free scarves and flags, love them or hate them but the clappers too. 

 

For what it's worth I agree with you in the players signed, the scouting network and all that, but undoubtedly Vichai was a big catalyst to all of that happening. Manderic was trying to do stuff on the cheap and his goal was always to rise our stock on a limited budget and sell up. He never invested anything that he didn't think he could double his money while we spent the odd million on Gallagher and Wellens there were more free transfers and loans on the likes of Brown and Bruce. Vichai came in, made mistakes early doors but had ambition and once that ambition worked it's way down through the entire structure we gained promotion, don't forget how we all laughed when he said he wanted European football within 5 years after that! 

 

If you think that Manderic would have authorised a £1million January transfer in Drinkwater or £8million on Ulloa and £3million on an ageing Huth then you have fonder memories of him than me. Even going further back the likes of Nugent and Schmeichel may never have joined us if it wasn't for Vichai bringing in Sven and following that ambition he had. He may not have over invested but he did more for this club than your giving him credit for, and I'm almost certain that even if you suggested to Vardy that he should have had a statue before Vichai he'd spit his redbull out laughing.

 

if we're brutally honest if he hadn't have died in such tragic circumstances then he probably wouldn't have a statue, but he did and it's full deserved when you consider everything he did, not only for the club but for the city, his charitable donations and giving the fans something to be proud of after years of mediocrity 

[Sampson]

47 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

But what about what he did for the city outside of the football club? You seem to be forgetting that.

 

Plus all the little things that other clubs didn't and still have have? The fan involvement, the free drinks and cakes etc the free scarves and flags, love them or hate them but the clappers too. 

 

For what it's worth I agree with you in the players signed, the scouting network and all that, but undoubtedly Vichai was a big catalyst to all of that happening. Manderic was trying to do stuff on the cheap and his goal was always to rise our stock on a limited budget and sell up. He never invested anything that he didn't think he could double his money while we spent the odd million on Gallagher and Wellens there were more free transfers and loans on the likes of Brown and Bruce. Vichai came in, made mistakes early doors but had ambition and once that ambition worked it's way down through the entire structure we gained promotion, don't forget how we all laughed when he said he wanted European football within 5 years after that! 

 

If you think that Manderic would have authorised a £1million January transfer in Drinkwater or £8million on Ulloa and £3million on an ageing Huth then you have fonder memories of him than me. Even going further back the likes of Nugent and Schmeichel may never have joined us if it wasn't for Vichai bringing in Sven and following that ambition he had. He may not have over invested but he did more for this club than your giving him credit for, and I'm almost certain that even if you suggested to Vardy that he should have had a statue before Vichai he'd spit his redbull out laughing.

 

if we're brutally honest if he hadn't have died in such tragic circumstances then he probably wouldn't have a statue, but he did and it's full deserved when you consider everything he did, not only for the club but for the city, his charitable donations and giving the fans something to be proud of after years of mediocrity 

I'm not forgetting that - that's one of the reasons why I said he was a great chairman. It was you who asked who achieved more and came back when answered players who did achieve more that it was all because of his investment into the team. I'm not saying he didn't put back into the community or wasn't great to the fans, but that also isn't particularly relevant to who achieved more at Leicester or the reasons why we were so successful. I just hear this opinion a lot since his death that Vichai was the most important person in the club's history above the players, managers and backroom staff who were a part of our golden era and I just think, as good a chairman as he was for us at the time, it's people going way overboard because of the tragedy of his death. I don't really remember people saying Vichai was the main reason we won the league above the backroom staff infrastructure, the players and the contributions of both Ranieri and Pearson.

I don't have particuarly fond memories of Mandaric, my point was we already had spent roughly £1mil on Paul Gallagher and around £1.2mil on Richie Wellens after just being promoted back to the Championship under Mandaric and I don't really think the £1mil transfers on Morgan and Drinkwater or the £1.2mil on Schmeichel were a massive step up on that.

 

Ulloa was signed after we were promoted and had the massive windfall of PL money, so we don't realistically know what other chairman would've spent on promotion. As a comparison, Cardiff who had gone up as Champions the previous season, under their much derided ownership of Mehmet Dalman actually spent a decent amount more than us when they were promoted the previous season (including £9.5mil on Gary Medel, £8mil on Steve Caulker, £8mil on Andreas Cornelius, plus a further 5 players who cost them £2mil+ each including a past-it Odemwinge). The main difference between us and Cardiff the season before was not really the chairmen or the spending, it was our great scouting team and the fact we actually players who were brilliant value for money like Albrighton, Ulloa, Simpson, Cambiasso and then Huth on loan in January. Then did even better with our signings the following season.

We did invest more under Vichai than under Mandaric unquestionably, but my point was we weren't buying our way into anything and there were other chairman who spent more and ended up being ridiculed and that it's not unreasonable to think we could've achieved the same thing under another chairman or we wouldn't have failed miserably under Vichai had we not had such a good scouting and sports science system and such a good backroom staff, because it wasn't like when early 90s Blackburn, early 00s Chelsea or early 10s Man  City got new owners and started winning things because other clubs couldn't compete financially

 

Vichai was a great chairman and gave a lot to the city and fans, but he also unquestionably kind of lucked out a lot that he came into a club who had as good a infrastructure as basically any club in Europe at the time. You compare us to other Championship clubs at the time from when Vichai took over who also invested simiarly like Cardiff, QPR and Blackburn or even PL clubs like Everton, Villa or Fulham and the difference between us and them isn't really the money invested by the ownership, it's the backroom staff, the players and 2 excellent managers in Pearson and Ranieri. Under Vichai it could've very easily gone the same way it did at Cardiff, QPR or Blackburn, it wasn't really him who was making the difference that set us apart from those clubs.

That's why I don't think Vichai was as important as the players, backroom staff or managers, because, yes, we needed a certain level of investment which Vichai provided, but it wasn't notably more than our rivals and I don't think much would've been different if it wasn't just another wealthy person who came in and allowed that investment, which other Championship and lower PL clubs also had at the time. it wasn't Vichai at all what made us stand out or win things over those other clubs, that was the players, backroom staff and structure managers, the backroom structure at least, had already been in place for 2 seasons before Vichai took over. 

Anyway, to get back to the original post. I just agree with Nalis, that to me someone like Vardy is ultimately a much more important figure in Leicester City's history and much more deserving of a statue for what they did for the club than Vichai. 

Edited 16 July 2023 by Sampson

[ParkerPen]

cult of the owner thing is a bit weird. I'd prefer player statues but hey ho.

 

not expecting to win any popularity contests here, just don't try and convince me people buy football clubs because of altruism

[Dahnsouff]

2 minutes ago, ParkerPen said:

cult of the owner thing is a bit weird. I'd prefer player statues but hey ho.

 

not expecting to win any popularity contests here, just don't try and convince me people buy football clubs because of altruism

But players do?  

[ParkerPen]

5 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

But players do?  

players are all mercenaries, whats your point ?

[Dahnsouff]

3 minutes ago, ParkerPen said:

players are all mercenaries, whats your point ?

You are saying or at least owners are in for themselves, so not sure what your point was then!

[ParkerPen]

3 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

You are saying or at least owners are in for themselves, so not sure what your point was then!

that I would rather celebrate sporting achievement not business involvement

Edited 16 July 2023 by ParkerPen

[BlueSi13]

The fact we don't have a statue of Gordon Banks blows my ****ing mind.

[honeybradger]

5 hours ago, BlueSi13 said:

The fact we don't have a statue of Gordon Banks blows my ****ing mind.

I may be wrong but i seem to remember reading that he has no love for the club as we forced him out for Shilton. 

 

Statues should only be for players that have a special relationship with the club.

[TJQuik]

13 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

But players do?  

How is being a gun for hire as an athlete remotely similar to buying a football club to help you carry out your shady business practices? Surely you must have realised that made no sense as you typed it.

 

You could be the love child of patrick bateman and darth vader and as long as you pump some money into a football club the normally sane fans would say "well he's invested a lot into the club and we've got a free coconut drink every few months, so you can't complain really!"

[Dahnsouff]

5 minutes ago, TJQuik said:

How is being a gun for hire as an athlete remotely similar to buying a football club to help you carry out your shady business practices? Surely you must have realised that made no sense as you typed it.

 

You could be the love child of patrick bateman and darth vader and as long as you pump some money into a football club the normally sane fans would say "well he's invested a lot into the club and we've got a free coconut drink every few months, so you can't complain really!"

Because whether you own the club or are just employed on exorbitant wages by said club, you are in it for yourself - come on you are not dumb, this is obvious   

[foxsake]

As Caesar!

Edited 17 July 2023 by foxsake

[Sampson]

2 hours ago, honeybradger said:

I may be wrong but i seem to remember reading that he has no love for the club as we forced him out for Shilton. 

 

Statues should only be for players that have a special relationship with the club.

He used to be a co-commentator on our European games in the 90s and talked of us fondly in interviews. He did admit he was annoyed and couldn’t believe it when he was told he was being sold back in 1967, but I don’t think he held a grudge and still looked back at the club fondly.

[honeybradger]

6 minutes ago, Sampson said:

He used to be a co-commentator on our European games in the 90s and talked of us fondly in interviews. He did admit he was annoyed and couldn’t believe it when he was told he was being sold back in 1967, but I don’t think he held a grudge and still looked back at the club fondly.

You know more than me from the sounds of it, i think it may be Shilton who i'm thinking of in terms of not having a good connection to the club, feel free to correct me if im wrong again.

[Sampson]

26 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

You know more than me from the sounds of it, i think it may be Shilton who i'm thinking of in terms of not having a good connection to the club, feel free to correct me if im wrong again.

The fans didn’t like Shilton for many years after he left the club and used to boo him when he came back during the 70s and 80s, because he claimed to be a Leicester fan, but it was felt he left to go to Stoke, which was a sideways move at the time, for the money. He then joined Forest and had some pretty public news stories about him having an alleged affair that fans lodged into I guess.

 

This is 40-50 years ago now though. And a lot of it was petty on the fans part.

[RonnieTodger]

9 hours ago, BlueSi13 said:

The fact we don't have a statue of Gordon Banks blows my ****ing mind.

Insult to injury that Stoke proudly display a statue of him holding the World Cup.