inckley fox

Taylor made some horrendous decisions, even if he gets a sprinkling of credit for his part in our early season form, and a respectable enough mid-table finish. He totally blew the Heskey money, and more, which led to financial disaster when the wheels came off. He signed Akinbiyi, Lewis and Lee Marshall and insisted on playing them way beyond the moment that it became clear that they were hopeless. He split his duties between City and England at a time when our form was faltering. He also signed Wise, who upset half the squad, put Davidson out for three months and was involved in a winding up order on the club. He switched Izzet to the wing and went to a 4-4-2 which he had to abandon at half time in our first game of the season when we were 0-5 down against a newly promoted side. However three things should be said to offer some balance. One is the aforementioned mid-table finish. One is the fact that we weren't necessarily down when he left, and if Bassett had done a good job we'd barely talk about how crap he was. The third is that the criticism - much of which came from Walsh after his exit - that he'd 'systematically dismantled' the O'Neill team is, as you suggest, unfair. He inherited an ageing squad (Flowers, Taggart, Elliott, Sinclair, Walsh, Cottee, Guppy were all the wrong side of 30, Lennon, Impey and Collymore weren't far off, and Marshall, who Taylor was slated for barring from training, wasn't even our player) and many of the players who left were simply coming to the end of their careers. Lennon pushed for his exit, Stan got into trouble again, so it was hardly all the manager's doing. He was still extremely crap of course. But Ruud is more comparable with Bassett, who was also crap but not really responsible for the downturn, than Taylor.

Surely he took us over in June? (Or have I missed something?!)

If King is serious about being a manager, it'd just be a case of one unproven manager who has had nothing in the way of new ideas, and shown himself to be incapable, being subbed out for another unproven manager who might well cut his teeth on the job. You never know what you might find, if he has the mandate to be brave with new ideas, and even braver when it comes to sidelining players who aren't fulfilling their most basic professional duties. If that's the stipulation, then it would make more sense then a costly, short term interim appointment, or a longer term manager who'd forever be tarnished by what happens in the next few months. Unless there are green shoots of improvement before the end of the season, we'll need a fresh start in the summer. If Ruud has to go, and we accept that only a miracle can save our season, then this is the most affordable of the 'wild stab in the dark' / 'nothing to lose' options.

I have a feeling that most of the footballing community, if not all (us excepted), thinks we've been extremely dumb over Cooper. They'd say that any manager who'd inherited that squad, with a pending points deduction, limited funds and a fanbase (soon to be followed by a dressing room) stacked against him, had done quite well to have them in 16th. The same players who were partying on the day he was fired - and who have been responsible for our recent form, and who in many cases got us relegated last time round - had clearly abandoned the Cooper cause some time before he departed. Which makes it hard to imagine how things might have been if fans and players had given him a chance. We might try to kid ourselves that these outsiders in the media have no idea what's really going down in Leicester, but anyone with half a brain outside of our neck of the woods knows full well that we've been silly. For what it's worth, I think we probably did make the wrong appointment with Cooper, though I found it staggering to hear people suggest he was way below our level, or a hopeless incompetent with nothing to offers (especially as these were often the same people who thought the entirely unproven Ruud to be a stellar appointment). But I don't think Cooper did a great job, I don't think his transfer policy was right, I do think things would have gone downhill if he'd continued, and I think it was wise to fire him, even if much of that was down to the fact that neither fans nor players were going to give him a chance to be successful. Even so, there are so many other factors to consider. Years of poor recruitment under successive managers. The whole Maresca project, which was only ever going to end in a serious rethink once we got promoted, and which only uncovered one single player who would prove PL standard (contrast that to our promotions in 1983, 1996, 2014, when we stayed up). A large number of (inherited) overpaid players who overestimate their worth to the club, and football as a whole. Regarding transfers, Cooper never seemed to value Okoli or Skipp himself particularly, so there's a question over whose babies they were. As for Reid and Ayew... Clearly we'd spent 5m on a winger in 2023, and committed to a further 12-15m or whatever for another one, and in 2024 we couldn't afford more. So we bought experienced back-ups. We needed the class of '23 to step up - and they didn't - so the back-ups ended up being first choice. They weren't dreadful signings, regardless of my indifference to them, they just ended up playing way more than they should have due to poor form and injury. Our current plight goes way beyond Cooper, irrespective of his many errors. It goes beyond Ruud too, despite him appearing to be a lot less qualified than his predecessor for the post.

If we'd spent 5m and got the Vardy of last season, which is what his wages cost based on that, we wouldn't have moaned. Compared with the amounts we spent on Mavididi, Winks, Coady, even Ayew - fees and wages tallied - I don't think he's given us bad value for money over the past two years. For me, he's the least of our problems. He's an ageing legend who still has things to offer, but on whom we depend more than we should. You could have skipped some of the previously mentioned signings and found that alternative up front. How has the money we've splashed out on one of our better players over the past couple of seasons been the problem, either financially or in terms of performance?

Some might say Hamilton/Pleat, or Taylor/Bassett. But as some said Allen/Megson and Megson/Holloway were hard to beat. Cooper/Ruud has to be up there though.

Just utter, utter rubbish.

It's going to get a lot worse than 0.50 if we don't fire him.

I thought he probably left partly because he knew he'd be signing players like that. And it's not as if all of his signings came off either. Of those that did, only one has so far been able to make the step-up. Of course that could be down to the sorts of recruitment problems that have plagued us for four or more years. So Maybe it's harsh to have a go at Maresca for that, but then it'd be even harder to be critical of Cooper (given the greater restrictions, and the need to have PL-capable players). Some of the players who came in, including Okoli and Skipp, were hardly clear-cut first choices for him. The former was probably a product of long-term scouting. Either way, I am a bit surprised that people feel that - playing Enzo's style of football, with largely the same set of players and a limited budget - we'd be mid-table. That seems very hopeful to me.

Most agree that with Ricardo/Vardy older and KDH gone it's a weaker squad than the one which wasn't even in promotion form for us in the second half of last season. I'm not sure why they'd piss the league, and the collapse of Luton (whose eventual points total was higher than it seems ours will be) is a warning of what can happen. Complacency and arrogance are two of the worst hallmarks of this side and club, and I really can't be doing with more 'don't worry, we'll piss it' voices from the sidelines this time round. Even if we did, it'd be because we'd opted for the sort of short-termism which got us to where we are now. They need to build a young squad with a home-grown base - without a blind adherence to outdated footballing purism - and let it grow. Hopefully it will push for promotion next year, but if it doesn't it wouldn't necessarily mean that all is lost. In fact, if it's a consequence of us restructuring thoroughly, then we may have a better chance of being a good PL side 4-5 years from now than if we broadly stick with the same set-up, again try to capitalise on our experience rather than moving on from it, and add big names that we consider 'a class above' at that level.

I really hope not. His brand of football has been branded outdated by its own creator, and the drop-off we saw post-Xmas, when we weren't even in promotion form, is happening now with Chelsea. When we saw that it wasn't going to succeed with these players at this level we did an about-turn with the next appointment, leading to a whole load of discontent from players and fans who had bought into the great 'idea'. I really don't want to see an impact appointment with little long-term future. His transfer business, except for Mads, was either good enough for the FLC but not for the EPL (Winks, Mavididi and, elsewhere, Cannon), or simply not good enough, but nonetheless costly (Coady). The jury is out on Fatawu in that regard. It was a short-term fix designed to drive some belief, and top-end second tier, quality into a side, and capitalise on its technical superiority, but with little consideration to what came next. That approach, as opposed to bringing in genuine promise, gelling the best of the crop into a unit, and adopting an 'identity' (over-used word I know) which could actually be carried through, played huge part in our current demise. That and him sodding off as soon as the tricky part came around. What Enzo rightly understood was the need for a reset. Without that - say, if we'd have stuck with Rodgers or Smith and established ways of doing things - you really can slide. That's why I expect and hope to see Ruud gone ahead of the next campaign, unless there are actually any new ideas at some point which might help us to make a fist of things, and a willingness to be unpopular with the personnel if it's a consequence of making changes. If there weren't a reset, this side would struggle, just as much of it did in the second half of last season, which is when the wheels really started to come off. I doubt they'll suddenly be regalvanised, even by a good manager. But, unless there's an embargo, we'll have funds from sales to refresh the squad with, and I expect we'll compete, regardless of whether the rebuild is well implemented. Still, I'd prefer us to play it a little less 'safe and steady' with our strategy. Run the risk of more than one year down there, get our financial house in order and build a squad - and style - with the potential for long-term success. And like in the early months of NP's second stint, funds might have to be kept to one side for accepting those lower end offers, taking a bit of a hit, and making sure decks are properly cleared. If we scramble to the play-offs with Daka up front, Coady and Vesty at the back, Ayew, Mavididi and Reid on the flanks etc. then we'll know what's coming next.

The Bassett side was bad, but not rotten through-and-through. It had Walker, Elliott, Sinclair, Impey, Izzet, Savage, Dickov, Piper. Some of them were ageing a bit, and I wasn't convinced the squad would do as well as it did after relegation, but I think it actually benefited from us having to offload some of the dross - Akinbiyi, Laursen, Wise, Cresswell, Marshall all left and we tightened up a year later. Bassett came close once or twice to turning a corner - I remember us losing to West Ham in a tight game where we'd have got out of the drop zone with a win. They were definitely better than this lot by a margin. They arguably underachieved that season and kept throwing points away. Lacked 'moral fibre', was how I think the manager kept putting it. The Adams team a couple of years later was a bit cobbled together and bargain basement, but it was usually competitive. The Little/McGhee side was poorer, but had a lot of players who'd play a part when we stayed up in 96/97: Grayson, Whitlow, Walsh, Parker were all in that team. Heskey made his debut that year. Joachim and Draper were there too. So yes, this is the worst top flight side I've known. I've heard a few people who go back a way further than me say that it'd give the McLintock side a run for its money, and of course the remnants of that side ended up 17th after it went down. At least they had Wallington, Weller, Sammels, Rofe, Whitworth, even Worthington early in the season. All guys who'd excelled in the not-so-distant past. Too many of our current side - Faes, Okoli, Vestergard, Kristiansen, Soumare, Mavididi, Daka etc. - will never be up to it, and never have been. It's hard to compare it with our second tier sides, but I suspect it's inferior to many of the better ones, regardless of what it looks like on paper. As for the rubbish ones, the Pleat era side actually had some better players than we've got now (Walsh, Mills, McAllister, Newell, Osman, Campbell, Wright all featured at varying points in time). The sell-to-buy policy crippled it. The post-Adams period was perhaps the lowest for me, though the side that went down in 2008 had a better defence than this one.

Definitely. Our downturn began last season.

I hope not.

I take your point entirely but, for example, I can't hold Bilal to be as responsible for our plight as I would Wout Faes. Within that steaming shite-strewn stew we've been served up, I'd consider Vardy to be a manky string of carrot rather than a resplendent floating turd like, say, Soumare or Winks. If that makes sense.

I agree entirely with that. But I don't see how he's one of our major issues right now. Not only because I think no striker could thrive in this team at this moment, but also because the only real issue with Vardy is the failure to replace him, or at least offer an alternative. Maybe even a strike partner. None of that is his fault. As for his influence, I think reports of his role in Ranieri's departure have been long-since discredited. He was also supposed to have been one of the few not to turn on Cooper. So it doesn't seem like he's a great problem in that regard. There are plenty of other more glaring issues to address, in the short term at least, than Vardy.

How? Other than being ancient?

Cooper isn't a substandard manager. He struggled in difficult circumstances, and fans who thought we were top ten material turned on him, followed by a set of players who had nothing like the credit in the bank to turn on a manager. As such his position became untenable while we were still 16th. He had to go, and almost certainly would have got us relegated, but a huge part of the reason for his departure being necessary was the fact that people weren't willing to get on board. A whole load of nonsense was subsequently peddled about him being way below the mighty Leicester in terms of his credentials, and that notion has seen other clubs point out how silly the Leicester fans and players have been. There's no doubt that we haven't covered ourselves in glory with the Cooper-Ruud switch, as of yet. Was he the best appointment? Quite possibly not. Was he some sort of chancer way out of his league? No. Was Ruud the upgrade that his detractors claimed he was? No. And can he blame Cooper, as opposed to years and years of mismanagement, or a squad packed with utter dreck, for being ill-prepared? Definitely not. The funds Cooper had weren't spent wisely - that's true. But we signed one asset, made a couple of howlers, brought in a good loanee, and then signed some squad filling individuals who have ended up featuring way more prominently than they should have. It's not a starkly inferior window to the one where we brought in Daka and co., or the one where brought in Kristiansen/Souttar and co., or the one where we brought in Coady/Cannon and co. The suggestion being that our recruitment is systemically poor, regardless of who is in charge.

Well, that might be a good call. I've watched him from a distance but don't know enough about his style of management, nor the set of circumstances he's had to deal with, to be certain. People also mention Rohl, of course. Without question, those are the sorts of coaches I'd be interested in. While I have no particular interest in how 'English' we are, it might be a good time to go back to the Pearson-era ethos of developing a home-grown backbone to the squad. I remember when we signed Mahrez he said 'we can sign players like him and Knockaert now that we have a native core to the squad established'. If we want to uproot the dressing room politics, it might be a good starting point.

He'd have been an unintelligent, uninspiring choice who, like Ruud and Cooper, has looked like he's not cut out for management at the highest level. I'd honestly prefer a bright, upcoming manager from the lower tiers if he's (a) adaptable, and not stubborn enough to be unwilling to entertain new ideas and (b) a character who doesn't mind being unpopular with the players (unlike Ruud, according to that BBC article) if that's a necessary consequence of making them brutally aware of their own shortcomings.

The risk is we splash out now on a manager tasked with survival, and without a vision for the long-term. If and when they sack Ruud, they need to either bring in a guy for next season and make clear that survival isn't necessarily the expectation, which is a big call, or allow a member of the coaching team to have an extended stint as caretaker, and save the money for a guy who can start with a clean slate in the summer. The alternative would be an interim team, but they tend to be quite costly. I certainly think it'd have to be accompanied by a significant boardroom change at the club. If it were, the mood around the place would at least mellow a bit. It's very hard to see Ruud having any joy this season. He's simply waited way too long to explore solutions. And there's absolutely no reason, as many have said, to believe he's the one for a rebuild in the second tier. The question is whether he's even managerial material.

He's probably got more in common - in terms of circumstances/outcomes rather than style - with Bassett rather than Taylor. He's making a hash of an admittedly difficult situation. As for Taylor himself, there were quite a few arguments put forward at the time by people who felt he'd been hard done by. I didn't agree with any of them, but they went along the lines of 'he inherited an ageing squad which was held together by a manager's unique charisma, started the first season superbly, was undone by a freak cup game (at the end of our best FA Cup run in two decades) but still got a respectable 13th place finish... and it was too early in the following campaign to sack him'. The dismal nature of the relegation and the subsequent financial catastrophe kind of swept that argument away, but I suppose there are at least achievements of sorts you can point towards with Taylor, even if they're set against a backdrop of complete Armageddon.

Speaking of the last four appointments, it's worth adding that the successful 'first two' have their share of the blame for where we are now. Rodgers recruited poorly, with his success depending on the youth set-up, and the Pearson-to-Puel era squad-building. Obviously his negligence led to the first relegation. Maresca had the most expensive second tier squad ever, and still nearly blew promotion, with us falling well short of automatic promotion form in the second half of last season. He also introduced a possession-based game which was simply never going to work at this level with the squad we've got, then buggered off, leaving us scrambling for a more tactically flexible manager. It was the worst kind of short-termism.

I don't think we do know that. Which manager would you be talking about? Or is this going back to the totally unfounded Ranieri-era rumours? If we ever intended to be a serious top flight proposition then we should have set up to use Vardy sparingly. Regardless of our failure to do that, he's still the least of our problems right now (especially given the alternatives). And no striker on earth would thrive in this team.

Yes, but at least he only played 15-20 games before I had the pleasure of seeing him fired.