Matt_Lcfc

It’s no different at any other club really. What posters on here fail to recognise is that practically every ground is similar to ours. You have to think out of all the grounds that you have visited: how many have you been impressed by? I have been to the majority in the league, and I’ve only really walked away from Elland Road and *occasionally* at Villa Park and thought that it was a good atmosphere.

For one, I want a better atmosphere, but you can’t just create a system which is based on who creates the most atmosphere. Aside from the obvious point in that it’s impossible to measure, you have to respect that these people have continued to follow us every single week (in many cases). It’s not particularly how I want to watch a game, but you have to accept the fact that some supporters are older, and perhaps they don’t want to be jumping up and down all game. It’s a broader point in that how you behave at 25 vs 75 is completely different. Besides, I am sure that every single club have elderly supporters who want to sit down, we are no different in that regard. You can’t just hound people out on the basis that they don’t sing. People have paid, so they’re free to enjoy it however they want. It’s not what I like, but it’s important to not develop a superiority complex and think that you’re a better fan because you ‘get behind the ladzzzz.’

Detained for throwing a flag on the pitch and then found guilty for ‘throwing a missile onto the playing field.’ Leicester police should be ashamed…

It was about looking at the bigger picture though. I know that we did pretty well in the Conference League, but finishing 3rd in a group which had Spartak Moscow and Legia Warsaw was quite rightly deemed to be a failure. We had also been knocked out the cup by Liverpool (who weren’t even bothered) and I found Rodgers responsible for that loss, his tactical changes were bizarre, we were completely in control of that game. It was a mere reflection of his game management skills. This coupled with the fact that we had been poor domestically during that period meant that there was a justification to sack him. The collapse at home to Spurs was when I started to sway towards wanting him gone, the Forest game was the final straw.

I have never been bothered about the media portraying us as villains. The same happened with Ranieri, that was the right decision, clearly he was taking us down. But my initial point was that the poster was saying that he wanted Rodgers out in September 2021. The problem with this is that there was no real justification for sacking Rodgers at that point, and the points that he listed lacked evidence (at the time). The best time to sack him would have been after the Forest FA Cup game. He should’ve been hung out to dry after that pathetic, clueless display.

Whilst people were concerned about our trajectory, I do not believe that there was any general consensus of wanting Rodgers out during that period. I don’t understand your arguments. It’s really hard to say that players were regressing and Rodgers was taking us backwards - just checked and the Warsaw game was the 30th September. Very early in the season, no? Not only that, but we literally won the FA Cup four months before. Also not sure about your final point - which players are you referencing? Most thought that Daka and Soumare were really marquee signings for us, and to be fair, I’d attribute ‘failed signings’ a product of not finishing in the top four, not Rodgers. Of course, I agree with your points now, but I just do not understand what evidence you have that these arguments had any plausibility in 2021.

Should clearly go now, but sacking him then would have led to us being vilified both in the fanbase and through the media. You can’t just constantly call for the manager to go, wait for bad form, and then claim you were right

I like Spence, he has a point to prove. If we can negotiate a cheap loan then its a no-brainer for me. The people who don't rate him have short memories, it was only eleven months ago that he made our players look very stupid in that FA Cup game against Forest.

Pretty sure that this debate has been had about a million times on FT.

Fair enough, you are probably right in the sense that he has been on a downwards trajectory - but doesn’t mean that I would describe him as ‘poor.’ It’s pretty irrelevant though, as it’s very minor to the arguments that you are proposing in your article, I am just being pedantic. Nice article though mate

In reference to Jamie Vardy: 'He has been poor for the last 2 seasons.' Each to their own, but I would not consider thirty goals and ten assists to be a bad return over the course of the last two seasons tbh.

I think that you’d be surprised, unfortunately. It’s really shocking I know - wish that more of our fans had kicked up a fuss. Vile racist who shouldn’t come back.

Incredibly alarming that people perceive this to be an acceptable way to behave. Assuming they’re of age, his grandchildren should be calling him out.

Fully agree with this post. Brighton really impressed me yesterday, I thought they were incredibly well-drilled and deserved to win the game (based on the chances created). The fact that our squad has been assembled for a larger cost makes it a bitter pill to swallow. It’s just so irritating, as like you say, there are good managers out there if you are brave enough to make a change. I am so desperate for somebody to come in with fresh ideas and instil some fight back into the club.

It has probably already been said but why is Rodgers saying that ‘there’s a number of players who don’t care enough’ and then in the same interview, saying ‘you have to respect the available players, they’re giving everything.’ What on earth is he talking about, constantly talking in riddles and contradicting himself means that the message he is sending out in the media is so unclear. So much for his ‘elite level’ managerial skills….

Yeah, so you start him with Iheanacho….

All because Rodgers has an agenda against players. He seems to fall out with certain people at the club and be too stubborn to change things. It is a massive issue as I think that most people would agree that Soyuncu is better than Amartey and Iheanacho is a better option than Daka / Barnes.

I agree, I accept that we are short of wingers, but you surely do not respond to that by starting two. I just don’t understand the shape, I assume it’s 4-3-3, but I am not sure as to why you would push Praet out wide - there is absolutely nothing that I have seen which points him to being able to play on the wing. I would either play the diamond or push Iheanacho out wide. It’s non-sensical as I think that Vardy and Kel complement each other really well.

Serious question: what does Iheanacho need to do to start? It’s so evident that one up top isn’t working and he provides that link when Maddison is out.

Trossard signing for Arsenal, the reported fee is around the £27m mark. This is a sensible signing, PL experience, fairly low-risk and will provide good cover for Martinelli and Saka. I also think that not engaging in a bidding war with Chelsea for Murdyk will turn out to be a good decision. Not only is he unproven in this league, but when a players signs for a sum like that, then they are completely in the spotlight and scrutinised heavily. If I was chasing a league title, I wouldn’t want that….

Not sure what constitutes as ‘putting more money in recently than Vichai ever did.’ Do you mean players? As I am not sure that is factually correct if you consider inflation and windows like 16/17 and 17/18. If you are referencing to infrastructure, then that is a bit of a flawed argument. Look at how we have ‘paid’ for the training ground, it’s been borrowed against these loans (which is what this thread is basically about).

No, not really. I standby what I said yesterday, the income for the duty free shops does appear ‘obscure.’ I would imagine (similar to other billionaires) that this is a coverup for what they are really doing. I would guess that they have engaged with pretty shady deals through time, and my main concern is that the money seems to have dried up since the death of Vichai. Tbh, I think that he had the relevant connections that Top doesn’t have. Ultimately, there is a reason why we are suddenly so cash-strapped and I don’t think that’s it’s to do with duty-free shops.

Have you maybe thought why they have been able to diversify and maintain a monopoly. I am not saying that this is definitely this case, because nor me or you have an understanding about the ins and outs of King Power. But some critical thinking is needed here. I would imagine it’s similar to other billionaires: they have been able to maintain this monopoly due to good contacts. Thailand has plenty of problems with corruption, and Top / his inner circle have had close links with the shady people in that country for years. I won’t spell it out for you, but as I have said before, eluding to the notion that King Power have always operated legitimately is delusional.

How was it a haughty response mate, if you think that then it is your problem. I am well aware what your comments were about. My response was a mere reply to that, the word ‘obscure’ is probably correct because like I have clearly said, they have always had an undeniable link to the Thai Royal Family.

If you’re suggesting that they have made their wealth from duty free shops, then you’re a bit deluded. You have both conveniently ignored their cozying up with the Thai Royal Family; I would imagine that is where the bulk of their wealth is derived from.