Plane Banner - Liverpool at home.

[SafewayFox]

14 hours ago, evil jack said:

"The Winter View"

Just listened and great to hear a well respected journalist call out our numerous issues.

 

Fair to say nothing ground breaking but more media reports highlighting our issues and hopefully make Top and co, take note, can only be a positive.

[Pliskin]

I don’t care if the stadium is full of Liverpool fans. 
 

King Power need to be embarrassed, reputation is everything to them, and the only way the message gets through…… otherwise this ship will continue on its voyage to the iceberg. 

[MGLCFC]

9 hours ago, westernpark said:

Vichai did nothing. It was all Pearson. 

Honestly? Do you think we'd have won the league without Vichai taking over the club? Pearson was good, but let's remember, it was Cambiasso running the show that kept us up. Pearson didn't even play Albrighton initially, how bad a decision was that. I love Pearson and think he fits our club well, but he hasn't done that brilliant at other clubs without Shakespeare and Walsh along side of him.

Edited Friday at 07:47 by MGLCFC

[lcfc_forever]

16 hours ago, CosbehFox said:

Henry Winter critical of the owners decision making on his podcast. About as damning as you'd get off him 

Here is the link, worth a listen as a very good summary of the issues: 

 

[MattFox]

1 hour ago, SafewayFox said:

Just listened and great to hear a well respected journalist call out our numerous issues.

 

Fair to say nothing ground breaking but more media reports highlighting our issues and hopefully make Top and co, take note, can only be a positive.

He lives in Rutland and has a lot of links in the county

 

Winter is very knowledgeable about LCFC

[Pliskin]

32 minutes ago, lcfc_forever said:

Here is the link, worth a listen as a very good summary of the issues: 

 

He does summarise it well. Hits the main points!

[Winstonthedog]

2 hours ago, grobyfox1990 said:

And Lloyd dyer 

You mean Lloyd absolutely fuc?ing Dyer

[deep blue]

Just now, MGLCFC said:

Honestly? Do you think we'd have won the league without Vichai taking over the club? Pearson was good, but let's remember, it was Cambiasso running the show that kept us up. Pearson didn't even play Albrighton initially, how bad a decision was that. I love Pearson and think he fits our club well, but he hasn't done that brilliant at other clubs without Shakespeare and Walsh along side of him.

True, but you have to give credit to Pearson for having the nous to engage Shakespeare and Walsh, and especially putting together a squad with a good mentality.

Edited Friday at 08:54 by deep blue
Spelling

[MGLCFC]

4 minutes ago, deep blue said:

True, but you have to give credit to Pearson for having the nous to engage Shakespeare and Walsh, and especially putting together a squad with a good mentality.

Absolutely. What I didn't agree with was the original poster suggesting Vachai had done nothing and our success was all down to Pearson. Pearson was a part of that success, but, for me, Vichai had the understanding that he'd made a mistake sacking Pearson and was wise enough to employ him again. But to suggest all our success was down to Pearson is stretching it. It's a hypothetical question, but I wonder if Pearson would have been here for the 2015/16 season whether we would have still won the league? Perhaps we should be grateful to his son and partners in crime for the antics they got up to in Thailand which ultimately cost Nigel his job. 

[AjcW]

Top will be there Sunday. 

[LCFCJohn]

1 hour ago, MGLCFC said:

Honestly? Do you think we'd have won the league without Vichai taking over the club? Pearson was good, but let's remember, it was Cambiasso running the show that kept us up. Pearson didn't even play Albrighton initially, how bad a decision was that. I love Pearson and think he fits our club well, but he hasn't done that brilliant at other clubs without Shakespeare and Walsh along side of him.

It was far more than Pearson abilities as a coach. Scouting (Vardy, Kante, Mahrez), sports science resulting in a really good ‘lack of’ injury record and psychology (was it Ken Way we had) were what led the club on the road to the title and that was Pearson and his team. He understood the importance of having the right people around.

 

You could give Vichai/KP credit for bringing Pearson back but back is the key word. They booted him in the first place.

 

Credit for Ranieri? Come on, nobody thought that was an inspiring appointment. 
 

I’m not sure what you can particularly point to where you can give them credit for an actual well thought out plan or strategy. As the years go on it looks more like blind luck. 

[los dedos]

1 hour ago, LCFCJohn said:

It was far more than Pearson abilities as a coach. Scouting (Vardy, Kante, Mahrez), sports science resulting in a really good ‘lack of’ injury record and psychology (was it Ken Way we had) were what led the club on the road to the title and that was Pearson and his team. He understood the importance of having the right people around.

 

You could give Vichai/KP credit for bringing Pearson back but back is the key word. They booted him in the first place.

 

Credit for Ranieri? Come on, nobody thought that was an inspiring appointment. 
 

I’m not sure what you can particularly point to where you can give them credit for an actual well thought out plan or strategy. As the years go on it looks more like blind luck. 

Are you saying running a football club involves JUST hiring  the right man !

Yes its a very big part but to be a success there's a lot more to it than that.

I can't imagine that the likes of Brighton and other currently well run clubs just higher a decent manager and sit back and twiddle their thumbs. 

[Kitchandro]

4 hours ago, MGLCFC said:

Honestly? Do you think we'd have won the league without Vichai taking over the club? Pearson was good, but let's remember, it was Cambiasso running the show that kept us up. Pearson didn't even play Albrighton initially, how bad a decision was that. I love Pearson and think he fits our club well, but he hasn't done that brilliant at other clubs without Shakespeare and Walsh along side of him.

These criticisms are fair but it’s a not Vichai who solved those issues it? Pearson left only because of non-footballing reasons. We only ended up with Ranieri for circumstantial reasons and both managers had a comparatively small budget.

 

We wouldn’t have won the league without Holloway or Sousa taking over based on the butterfly effect but that doesn’t mean they contributed anything positive.

 

Vichai made some good decisions and some very poor ones, he was extremely lucky things fell into place with two managers and great scouting on a budget.

Edited Friday at 12:02 by Kitchandro

[MGLCFC]

2 hours ago, LCFCJohn said:

It was far more than Pearson abilities as a coach. Scouting (Vardy, Kante, Mahrez), sports science resulting in a really good ‘lack of’ injury record and psychology (was it Ken Way we had) were what led the club on the road to the title and that was Pearson and his team. He understood the importance of having the right people around.

 

You could give Vichai/KP credit for bringing Pearson back but back is the key word. They booted him in the first place.

 

Credit for Ranieri? Come on, nobody thought that was an inspiring appointment. 
 

I’m not sure what you can particularly point to where you can give them credit for an actual well thought out plan or strategy. As the years go on it looks more like blind luck. 

So, I'll ask again. Do you think Pearson would have won the league in 2016. Personally, I don't. Ranieri was pot luck, I agree, but he had that little bit of experience and knowledge of how to succeed. I still feel without Cambiasso's input, we'd have been back in the Championship. 

[LCFCJohn]

40 minutes ago, los dedos said:

Are you saying running a football club involves JUST hiring  the right man !

Yes its a very big part but to be a success there's a lot more to it than that.

I can't imagine that the likes of Brighton and other currently well run clubs just higher a decent manager and sit back and twiddle their thumbs. 

Not compatible examples. Brighton the structure is set by the club and managers are identified and brought in to fit this. The stuff we were doing well was implemented by the manager in Pearson. 
 

What have the club themselves done well? Give me some examples and I’ll happily admit to being wrong.

[LCFCJohn]

13 minutes ago, MGLCFC said:

So, I'll ask again. Do you think Pearson would have won the league in 2016. Personally, I don't. Ranieri was pot luck, I agree, but he had that little bit of experience and knowledge of how to succeed. I still feel without Cambiasso's input, we'd have been back in the Championship. 

No I don’t. But without his building of the club we’d have been stuck mixing it in the Championship.

 

It was a perfect storm. Pearson wouldn’t have had the temperament to keep calm and probably not the tactical nouse. But Ranieri wouldn’t have won it without Pearson’s squad. Ranieri was a better tactician and kept the pressure off and did a great job.

 

But you can’t compare the recruitment of either manager with the likes of Brighton in terms of credit to the ownership.

[UniFox21]

A pretty accurate segment 

 

 

[MGLCFC]

1 hour ago, LCFCJohn said:

No I don’t. But without his building of the club we’d have been stuck mixing it in the Championship.

 

It was a perfect storm. Pearson wouldn’t have had the temperament to keep calm and probably not the tactical nouse. But Ranieri wouldn’t have won it without Pearson’s squad. Ranieri was a better tactician and kept the pressure off and did a great job.

 

But you can’t compare the recruitment of either manager with the likes of Brighton in terms of credit to the ownership.

Yep, I agree and by the way I didn't compare either to Brighton

[Pliskin]

1 hour ago, MGLCFC said:

So, I'll ask again. Do you think Pearson would have won the league in 2016. Personally, I don't. Ranieri was pot luck, I agree, but he had that little bit of experience and knowledge of how to succeed. I still feel without Cambiasso's input, we'd have been back in the Championship. 

We wouldn’t have no. However, Pearson’s ideology on how a club should be set up meant when Ranieri came in, all he had to do was coach. He didn’t need to worry about transfers, recovery, sorts science etc. so he was the perfect tonic to a team with the right balance of talent, desire and work ethic. 
 

It was a one hit wonder, everything perfectly aligned, everyone pulled in the same direction and we rode on the crest of the wave of momentum. Vichai purchasing the club enabled this, absolutely. King Power undoubtedly took the club to a new level. But, successes are there to be commented, and mistakes are there to be questioned…. I don’t think any Leicester fan genuinely thinks Ill of Top, it must be difficult to recover from the tragic loss of his father, and we’ve got to accept his emotional connection with the club is going to be different now, than it was when his father was here. So for me there no coincidence that the club has declined in his father absence. It is my opinion that Kun Vichai was very good at recovering from mistakes, and dare I say, John Rudkin probably wouldn’t be here if he was still with us. 
 

King Power have lost control of the club, and this can’t be argued, strings of poor decisions have ultimately led to the most spectacular demise in modern football history, and that history tells us to bring it back around in this current regime will be very difficult. I have said it many times, in my opinion Top either needs to restructure his top office and bring in better footballing brains, or he needs to accept the club needs to be sold, to someone who can carry it forward. All good things come to an end eventually, and this may well be the end for King Power and Leicester city. 

[tylesta]

7 hours ago, grobyfox1990 said:

And Lloyd dyer 

And richie wellens

[accessory]

20 hours ago, LCFCJohn said:

No I don’t. But without his building of the club we’d have been stuck mixing it in the Championship.

 

It was a perfect storm. Pearson wouldn’t have had the temperament to keep calm and probably not the tactical nouse. But Ranieri wouldn’t have won it without Pearson’s squad. Ranieri was a better tactician and kept the pressure off and did a great job.

 

But you can’t compare the recruitment of either manager with the likes of Brighton in terms of credit to the ownership.

Ranieri raised Vardy, Mahrez and many other members of Pearson's squad - including fringe players like Drinkwater, Albrighton and Simpson - to levels they never even looked like reaching under NP.

 

He also signed Kanté - a player unsure about moving to England - and helped make him the world-beater he later became, when NP may well not have done so.

 

Sadly, Ranieri was undermined by a string of horrendous signings during summer 2016, in which Rudkin proved to be way out of his depth as a director of football, as he has done on many occasions since.

 

King Power's successes came largely through managers (Ranieri, Puel, Rodgers and Maresca) being proactive and seeking to use City as a vehicle for their own ambitions.

 

When they themselves have had to make the running, as with the last two disastrous managerial appointments, they've come badly unstuck.

 

They need to cut the cronyism, dump Rudkin (or at least offer him early retirement) and bring in a replacement who is genuinely up to the job.

[splinterdream]

21 minutes ago, accessory said:

Ranieri raised Vardy, Mahrez and many other members of Pearson's squad - including fringe players like Drinkwater, Albrighton and Simpson - to levels they never even looked like reaching under NP.

 

He also signed Kanté - a player unsure about moving to England - and helped make him the world-beater he later became, when NP may well not have done so.

 

Sadly, Ranieri was undermined by a string of horrendous signings during summer 2016, in which Rudkin proved to be way out of his depth as a director of football, as he has done on many occasions since.

 

King Power's successes came largely through managers (Ranieri, Puel, Rodgers and Maresca) being proactive and seeking to use City as a vehicle for their own ambitions.

 

When they themselves have had to make the running, as with the last two disastrous managerial appointments, they've come badly unstuck.

 

They need to cut the cronyism, dump Rudkin (or at least offer him early retirement) and bring in a replacement who is genuinely up to the job.

What if it isn't Rudkin making the decisions, but Top himself? 

[Skidmark]

Well done to @ozvaldo for his persistence and determination in being a vessel to bring about change and eyes to the fact our club needs change.

 

 

[Noahfence]

Assuming the sky cameras will be aware of this happening now? 

[The Year Of The Fox]

NOTAMS are up for it now (I believe)