inckley fox

In all honesty, I think they've been getting managerial calls wrong for longer than we necessarily think. The clock should have been ticking for Rodgers in the closing stages of 2021-22. It was clear that our spend in the summer of '21 hadn't added to the squad, and in the post-Forest defeat period it also became clear that we were going to fall short of a European finish and wind up in a financial mess. Our only 'way out' was to avoid relegation in 2023 and accept a small deduction, and the only way to do that was to get rid of a manager who wasn't toeing the line any more. Rodgers, for all his achievements, effectively guaranteed us relegation by constantly reminding the squad that they were relegation fodder when their paychecks suggested otherwise. And we let him. Smith, clearly, was either the wrong man to keep us up, or the right man two weeks late. His ppg suggests the latter, which is especially damning. Maresca, while as good a manager as we've had for some years, was the wrong appointment for that moment in time too. He's a very good manager who delivered what the bookies expected emphatically. But there were clearly doubts in the club that we could sustain his style of football upon promotion. If there weren't, Cooper would never have been the successor. There was also a feeling among all of us that we were providing a stepping stone for a manager who would be well-hyped and pushed for big things, as opposed to building a long-term project with us. His arrival - like our signings in the summer of 2023 - indicated that we weren't at all for rebuilding in the lower leagues over a year or two, getting our financial house in order, accumulating a promising young squad and then coming back with decks cleared, and well-braced for survival. This was about quick fixes. And now we're seeing that, sooner or later, we needed a longer-term rebuild, even if it meant some short-term pain. If you add to everything that we appeared to mislead two of the above three managers on our financial situation, resulting in one having a relegation-clinching sulk and the other griping at the very moment in time that the big clubs came calling, and it's not a pretty picture. Then you get to Cooper. Fans who felt we were a league above him, that he was a no-hoper, or that he was holding us back were wrong. And had we been hit with a serious financial penalty, perhaps he would have been a passable stopgap who made something of a fist of the campaign. But we weren't hit with the penalty, meaning we actually needed something very different. His past connections shouldn't have been such a huge factor, but they were, and those running the club should have been way more aware of the potential for a level of hostility which undermined our chances. The contrast between his style and the predecessor's, while perhaps a necessary tweak, was also never going to go down well with those in the dressing room who were brought in to implement that style, or those that bought into it. Again, the fault here doesn't purely lie with bringing Cooper in, but also having gone full-in on the Maresca project a year earlier. Still, Cooper's appointment - while seriously flawed - at least suggests some degree of reasoning on their part. Given the circumstances, and the kind of Catch-22 we found ourselves in, it's almost understandable. Which brings us to Ruud. Maybe he'll turn out to be a great manager - we wouldn't know yet if that's the case. But there aren't many reasons to believe in a man appointed for his aura and youth record, contracted on a whim by a chairman who knows little about football and had got bored of the advice of those he'd entrusted with the football side of things. The obvious solution was for the owner to get different advice, as opposed to charging in and taking the reins himself, but he didn't do that either. And when people who aren't very good at appointing managers appoint a manager you naturally respond to the first couple of hammerings by saying, 'here we go again'. King Power, I maintain, don't need to go. We'd be a lot better off if they simply put better people in charge of the operation. If, for instance, there was an acknowledgement of past errors, followed by Rudkin being moved sideways, an uprooting of recruitment and someone respected like Puel, Walsh or Pearson taking up the DoF role, and if this were coupled by Top saying 'look, we've got stuff wrong and this might take a few years to work out' - then I think people would at least see evidence of things going in the right direction. But if they won't learn from their errors, there's only two possible endings: Disaster or departure. If you didn't read all that, or did and thought I'd insulted your intelligence by stating what seems pretty obvious to me, then apologies. It's quite cathartic to have a moan, though.

I suppose there are some among us who have gone into positions of responsibility in their lives and been expected to do their homework to the degree that they're aware of the backstories and baggage of the personnel, in the same way many expect the manager to be with Ward. But to be honest, I've seen so football managers showing a lack of awareness of what's gone on before them that I wouldn't have expected this. If he's well aware of what went on earlier this season, and last, then we're probably not doing too badly in relative terms. I'm not sure I'd expect his research to be sufficient for him to be well-versed on fan reactions to individual, fringe players the season before last! What's worrying isn't so much the manager here, even if we are unsure of his suitability for the task. It's that, as a club, we seem to be less aware of important past events and dynamics than the average fan. The barracking of Ward was witnessed by dozens of people at the club in positions of influence, and nobody has communicated that to the new boss or, even worse, remembered it keenly enough to understand that it could be relevant. That suggests that, as an organisation we're not fit for purpose. In football we're frequently reminded that we fans have no grasp of the nature of goings in this most elite and meticulously run of operations, and then you see decisions being made which show a lack of knowledge that you wouldn't expect from anyone with the merest of experience of seeing us over time. That seriously undermines confidence in the club.

Thatcher was player of the season that year!

I'd agree, except for the spell Hodge had when he came back into the side for Muggleton near the end of 1990-91. He had a great run of games. Made some massive saves (Wednesday away rings a bell) and was crucial to us staying up. I would probably have Ward somewhere in the top ten, along with Logan and Pressman, but I find the whole conversation a tiny bit odd, since he really wasn't one of the main culprits last week.

Danny Ward really was one of the least blameworthy people for that result. He could do nothing for two goals, made a great stop and was very unlucky for the other. He's crap, and maybe players lost heart when he came on, but that's their fault, not his. Making this debacle all about him is not only embarrassingly overly simplistic, it also means we'll fail to address all of the other issues which we can actually affect. Danny Ward being rubbish, which we all knew already, is hardly the conversation to be had after our worst performance of the season, in which he was one of the less critical factors.

If you wanted to be thoroughly glass-half-empty you might say that the performance and result was worse than anything under Cooper, and that those who felt we were a good side being held back by an awful manager should be asking themselves questions. It's a poor squad, and we've had to grasp points that we've barely deserved under both managers. And I do think that Cooper would have been roundly derided, even with our limited options today, if he'd lost 4-0 after preferring McAteer to Facundo, and failing to address clear issues at HT. Some of the set piece defending also smacked of being poorly prepared. But the truth is that we're a bottom-end squad who will only compete when we're disciplined, well-organised and breaking our backs to cover the ground when we're out of possession. They fell well short of those prerequisites today, and were deservedly trounced.

No excuse for our defending on their goal. I was screaming that they had three on one if they went short, as happened from the previous corner on the other flank. Our goal kicks are creating opposition chances every time. We invite the challenge, get pressed, jab it blindly forward to an onrushing attacker. Every time. The wingers are doing a poor job of protecting their FBs, neither of which is coping with the pressure (as per). McAteer has been better than Mavididi but hasn't come close to justifying his selection over Facundo. Hamza is always utterly panicked on the ball, and unable to see the danger when he's off it. A dire performance from him; lacklustre at a time when you'd hope he'd be champing at the bit to show his worth. We deserve to be more than one down. I had low expectations, but so far we haven't come close to meeting them. We've been toothless and haven't competed. The only positives are the narrow margins, and the knowledge that we'll have more winnable games with a fuller squad available.

Totally. It's very hard to compare the nature of their success, and I certainly wouldn't wish to fly the flag for one of them at the expense of the other. Neither would be considered such a legendary Leicester manager but for the other's achievements, so they have a lot to thank each other for! But even if you've looked up some of the old, great Leicester bosses - Hodge, Orr, Gillies etc. - there's nothing which comes close to either taking a side up two leagues, keeping them there and forging a budget side which later wins the title; or alternatively, being the guy who delivers the latter. In fact, across all of football there are very few who have ever done anything that spectacular, especially in the modern era. As everyone else says, get well soon Nige.

It's just one of those things that has come to be seen over time as disrespectful. You might not agree with social norms, but as with all sorts of things you can either respect the norms or be seen as bad-mannered and selfish. Leaving a game early, to me, is a bit like speaking in a theatre or a library, or bringing your packed lunch to a bar. Those around you, and those doing their jobs, don't approve, so you're likely to come across as being disrespectful if you insist on doing it. Perhaps all of us have done all of these things at some point or other, and had our reasons, but it's not worthy of defending. And I wouldn't want to make an enemy of a librarian either, because they can be quite spiteful.

Well, he played a few minutes in an FA Cup game in the winter of 21/22 then a few minutes in a League Cup game in the winter of 22/23, just before his injury. People had been crying out for him pretty much non-stop in the interim period and accusing Rodgers of not putting much stock in our youth. The fact that he was injured in an FA Youth Cup game when many on here expected him to be training with the first team ahead of the next fixture kind of underlines that Brendan didn't expect him to be breaking through as early as we did. Yes, I'll grant you that the caretakers and interims couldn't have picked him, but Rodgers had plenty of Cup games between those two matches in which he could have blooded him. We're still talking about all three permanent managers and one set of caretakers who have overlooked whatever he has to offer. What I said isn't outright false, it just has the small caveat that one set of caretakers never had the chance to select him, for two games, and then an interim for seven or eight. That's a very small proportion of the 100 or so matches in which he's been available since his debut and not given a chance. I also badly want to see the next emerging talent. You're not alone in that. I'm just yet to see the proof that Will Alves is going to be the one that we've all been waiting for. It could well be the case that he would have got his chance under Rodgers were it not for the injury. But then again the same injury probably curtailed his chances under all of the subsequent managers, in that he simply couldn't get back up to speed. It may also mean that, since the injury, his development hasn't been what they'd previously hoped, and therefore all of them have been right not to go for him. If Rodgers, who had a fully fit (albeit younger) Alves at his disposal for longer than anyone else, can be excused for overlooking him, then surely it's also understandable that Enzo and Cooper did the same. Hopefully he'll get his chance and leave you feeling thoroughly vindicated and the rest of us wondering how consecutive managers could have been so daft to ignore him. After all, this is how we felt when Joachim, Heskey, Oakes, King, Gradel, Moore, Chilwell, Barnes and Dewsbury-Hall broke through - though in truth, it may just be the case that we waited for the right moment, and will do - if there's ever a right moment - with Alves. How many youth team prospects who didn't get their chance with Leicester truly proved, in later years, that we'd missed out? You could argue that one or two of the aforementioned could have been useful at an earlier date (Barnes, for instance, under Shakespeare and Puel; or KDH under Rodgers, seeing as both had impressed while out on loan), and there's a smattering of players over the past couple of decades who carved out a career at a respectable level despite not making the grade with us. But generally-speaking the much-hyped but overlooked names confirm, over time, why they were overlooked.

They are different people though. I don't know. I'm inclined to think there's something in it when we've been calling for a young lad that we've never seen to feature more - but three permanent managers, one interim and two sets of caretakers who all know him better seem to disagree. Hopefully I'm wrong, of course. And it wouldn't be the first time.

I'm a bit confused. He was poor and roundly criticised when we were relegated last time. He's been poor under Rodgers, Smith and Cooper at this level, as well as two different sets of caretakers. We've never been anything other than relegation fodder with Faes among our numbers at this level, and he's consistently been singled out as one of our weakest links. His gaffes would be deadly regardless of whatever system you were playing, and whoever was in charge. It's highly unlikely that any one specific manager is to blame for Wout Faes being substandard.

There's no way around it. If we go down now, and especially with 18-24 points, then people will very reasonably ask questions of the fans who pushed from day one for Cooper to go, the players who followed suit, and the board who took heed. Hopefully we don't get to that point. And Ruud will have done very well if things work out. Cooper lost his grip on things. But the poor quality of the squad, and recruitment over years, is the main issue. The coach might have needed to go, but I never got near the sense that we had a fine squad of players who could have wowed the PL if it weren't for the boss. Vichai consulting Vardy, Morgan, Fuchs, Kaspar and suchlike is a world away from Top being swayed by Faes, Vestergard and Winks. It's a poor squad that needs to humbly accept the task ahead.

There's quite a bit of overlap.

Weirdly, I don't think the three at the back, or the two surprise inclusions, were a major problem. Relatively speaking. You could criticise him for failing to address the Faes-Justin issue, but maybe the alternatives were a bit too adventurous for a caretaker. You could question Ayew's role. The lightweight midfield. And you could question the lack of pace for potential counters. But I thought he was very professional when he saw the game had gone away from us, and brought off our only two attackers who'd posed a threat, allowing the new manager to have a fit squad at his disposal in the week. If the new boss favours a 4-2-3-1 then you could argue that a switch in shape only days before his debut isn't helpful, but I'm not sure it's for a caretaker to research his successor's methods. And I doubt he'd had any input which had gone unheeded from Ruud. Honestly, I'd love to see root-to-branch change at the club, from players to remaining coaches to recruitment to football and financial operations at boardroom level, but I can more or less understand some of the decision-making today. Individually awful performances and poor application were bigger issues than management, and I sincerely hope that the new boss has a mandate to keep some of these half-arsed incompetents who'd undermined the previous manager on a very short leash. And I hope we're more patient than we were with Cooper, because these guys aren't worldbeaters who were being held back by an inept manager, as some have maintained. It's one of the poorest KP-era squads. If we end up on 18-22 points, I wonder how history will reflect on Steve Cooper's time with us, the hatred of him, and the decision to fire him. Unless things drastically improve under Ruud, that's a likely scenario.

We've been pretty rudderless with him, also.

I'd go along with that. The notion that we're a mid-table side being held back by Cooper was always utter nonsense. I totally understood his sacking, but people need to be realistic about our squad's limitations. To me, it's the worst KP-era squad since the pre-January 2012 days.

You must have been seeing something I didn't. Faes put in one of the worst top flight performances I've ever seen from a defender. Coady wasn't any good either, but there was a gulf in terms of how miserably awful the two of them were.

Clubs will show videos of Faes and Justin as examples of how not to defend at this level. Predictably substandard.

Exactly. Some of us, myself included, have found it hard to adjust to the fact that we're not where we were. Maybe the start to the season has bruised our egos a little, and we'll be a tad more grounded from now on. You could see it in the number of posts on here stating that Cooper had nowhere near the pedigree to be Leicester boss, despite several successful FLC seasons, an unlikely promotion and survival in the PL. Now we're enthusing about Van Nistelrooy and Corberan, neither of which have experienced that sort of success in English football, nor really at comparable levels elsewhere (no, I don't rate the Dutch top flight all that much, I'm afraid!). So I suppose this suggests that we're getting used to our new reality. Even so, most people who supported the sacking of Cooper weren't purely being entitled, in my opinion. It played a part, and some may have had their prejudices from the start, but I don't think it was entitlement in the end - just a creeping realisation that things weren't going to pan out well. If entitlement was an issue, I suspect that that would be more on the part of the playing staff. And, on top of that, people often confuse a sense of entitlement with ambition. Leicester fans have always been weird in that respect, going right back to my 1990s youth, and the O'Neill era. We always fancy ourselves, which is part of the reason why we ended up winning the league. O'Neill might still be sore that he left us 16 years before our finest hour, reportedly on the misconception that things couldn't ever get any better for us than they were in May 2000. I still love him though. And, for the sake of balance, he's also said some pretty damning things about Forest in the past.

Obviously if some players were unwilling to let go of Maresca's style of play - and that looks to be the case - then it was always going to pose a problem for anyone trying to implement a less possession-based approach. Especially when transfer business was so restrained. Personally, I feared we'd have been mauled if we tried to do in the PL what we'd done in the FLC, so I'm pretty dismayed by the allegations of a lack of professionalism on their part. It also indicates a lack of realism. Even so, I agree that the writing seemed to be on the wall with Cooper, and even under the circumstances his decision-making was seriously uneven. But if you're dealing with people who aren't willing to toe the line, or who have exceptionally inflated senses of their own worth, then you're bound to see decisions which are, on the surface, nonsensical. It happened early in Pearson's second reign too. And the fact that many of these players were involved in a wholly unexpected relegation in the recent past suggests that something is amiss with their application. There's a consensus in the journalism right now that there were four principal problems with Cooper: performances, form, player response and fan response. I thought the decision to get rid made sense because of these issues, but the truth is that many of us fans contributed to one of them. It's understandable for the most part, but at times it can't have been helpful. Plenty of fans are crowing now about how right they were, but their judgement was based on prejudice rather than giving him a chance and evaluating that it wasn't working. The number of things I heard and read related to his looks and his Forest connections, two entirely irrelevant matters, didn't reflect well. As for the relevant gripes, well, performances were indeed poor but we were in a respectable position in the league. He does have limited pedigree as a top boss, but then again many of those who've made a big deal of this would prefer Van Nistelrooy or Corberan, who have even less. That's just where we are as a club now. Again, some realism helps. It will be interesting to see how things work out, given that we're out of the relegation zone right now and fan pressure was likely a contributing factor to his sacking. I hope for our sake that those brave souls who've dedicated these past months to a Cooper Out campaign feel vindicated come May.

Getting a club promoted to the top tier, especially when it surpasses expectations, and then keeping them up, immediately makes you better than the average Championship manager. Look at the bosses in that league and you won't see many who have achieved that. And he did a good job in his other FLC post too. There is a valid argument for us starting to look elsewhere. But it isn't (a) that this squad would be soaring with any other manager or (b) that Steve Cooper is a bog standard second tier level manager. Both of those are non-starters which have been repeated over and over by people who were never willing to give him a chance in the first place. Plenty of them will claim to have been more astute than the rest of us, when in truth they were calling for a brand of football which would have seen us mauled with this personnel, and didn't even have us on promotion form in the second half of last season. Poor form, poor points per game over an extended period, discontent from fans to - you suspect - the players, inadequate line-ups and tactics in the early phases of games, a failure to either establish ourselves as an organised, hard-to-beat side or anything beyond that - coupled with the fact that all is not lost and we may still tempt some decent managers - constitute a sensible case for asking whether we can do better. But I do think that some of the anti-Cooper viewpoints are so flawed that they actually strengthen the opposing argument.

It's nowhere near that. Of the regular squad, Ward, Justin, Pereira, Kristiansen, Faes, Thomas, Vestergard, Soumare, Ndidi, Vardy, Daka all got relegated with us last time in this league. Maybe they shouldn't have gone down with Maddison, Barnes and KDH among the ranks, but without them they'd have sunk without a trace. And of those eleven players, eight of them have featured fairly regularly in both campaigns. After the additions of last year's signings, we were below promotion form for the second half of last season. Since then the transfer business has hardly been dazzling. The wingers - Mavididi, Reid, Fatawu - have been inconsistent at best, and one is out for the season. Under three different managers, since Congerton's exit, we've invested 160m on players. It hasn't been good enough. And it was nowhere good enough for years before that either. The highlights of that investment have been Hermansen, who has done very well, and Winks, who has been up and down this year. Mavididi and Fatawu have shown flashes at this level. Ayew has had a good cameo or two. The jury's out on Bilal. Facundo is impressive, but on loan. And then it's all downhill from there - Cannon, Coady, Reid, Edouard, Kristiansen, Souttar, Faes, Okoli, Skipp; 70m or so on players who haven't added anything as of yet. We have one available RB, who is awful. None of the CBs have peformed with any consistency. Our LB options are all poor. Our most highly-rated winger is out for the season. Our star man is nearly 38. I just don't see how, considering all of the above and the performance levels this season (and in the past) of these players, you could conclude that but for Cooper we'd be a top-half PL side. No, he's not doing a great job with what he's got, but it's crazy to think that this squad isn't roughly where you'd expect it to be.

Vardy had nothing to do with it. I didn't even know how to assess a striker who was that badly cut off.

I don't think Moyes is really renowned as a possession-based manager. If that's our priority - and it shouldn't be, given our squad - then Russell Martin might be available sometime soon. Like you, I'd prefer Moyes to that. Also, I'm not sure getting the best out of Ricardo is going to be on the agenda if we're appointing a new manager anytime soon!