Kilworthfox

Maybe Chelsea buy him for £40 million 👀🤗

Personally I'm delighted. It's the best possible outcome as all the evidence over the past 2 seasons lead me to predict, we would have been languishing in the relegation zone by Christmas, and would have struggled to stay up with his brand of football in the premier League, as he is essentially playing the same football as Rodgers. Possession obsession with little attacking threat. Also he never organised our defence to defend as an effective unit. We must be come a difficult side to score against, otherwise we will be in the bottom third of the prem. Not where we want to be. Enzo did the job he was employed to do, just!!! He had every resourse to finish first and we did. We made an effort of it however. I live in hope that we change the style of play, because it's not the most effective way of playing considering the squad we currently have, and have had for years. Also it is dreadfully boring to watch. I don't mind being bored but we have to win! I feared next season under EM we would have just repeated 22/23. I live in hope we have a structured manager who puts defense first, and not possession. Also the compensation will be a minor bonus that can aid our FFP.

He would be a better presenter if he explained events and facts as they occur, rather than making every broadcast about himself, and his inflated ego.

I think he is already aware mate 👀

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-69056071 Ex-BBC Leicester journalist Ian Stringer loses tribunal clam Mr Stringer was hired by BBC Leicester in 2008 after he appeared on the BBC's show The Apprentice A former BBC sports journalist who claimed he was unfairly dismissed for whistleblowing has lost an employment tribunal. Ian Stringer was employed by BBC Leicester in 2008 after he appeared on the BBC's show The Apprentice. A tribunal heard how he believed he was unfairly dismissed in 2022, for what the BBC said was misconduct. Presiding judge Kimbra Welch has dismissed Mr Stringer's unfair dismissal claims in a written ruling. Mr Stringer brought both an automatic unfair dismissal claim for whistleblowing and an ordinary unfair dismissal claim against the BBC. The tribunal in Leicester heard that Mr Stringer, who became the station's Leicester City reporter, was suspended in September 2021 and sacked the following year. He had been dismissed after bosses raised concerns about his use of social media and his failure to declare the "gift" of a car. Mr Stringer argued that a BBC investigation was "defective" and that he had been "treated differently" to others - including former England footballer and BBC television presenter Gary Lineker. The hearing was told Mr Stringer had, during the disciplinary process, compared his actions with those of Lineker, who, he said, had relationships with commercial entities outside the BBC. Employment Judge Welch had explained in her ruling how Mr Stringer had complained to an area manager about an incident in July 2021. He claimed his line manager had forced another journalist to break Covid rules "provided" by the BBC and the government. Mr Stringer said his colleague had been told to "come in and present a show", despite having been in contact with someone with Covid. Social media concerns In the same month, an acting news editor had "raised concerns" regarding Mr Stringer's "use of Twitter"- particularly about him "endorsing commercial products and businesses". The employment tribunal heard Mr Stringer was given impartiality training in 2013 and an anti-bribery course in 2020 The hearing was told how Mr Stringer had been given free use of a BMW 5 series and then an Audi A3 via a Leicester-based vehicle rental firm called Total Motion. Judge Welch said the tribunal found that, as a result of "receiving them", Mr Stringer had posted tweets promoting the company and the cars. Mr Stringer had been suspended pending investigations into allegations of a breach of BBC "editorial and impartiality" guidelines. The BBC had carried out an investigation, the tribunal heard, and found more than 300 "shout outs" to companies or people who had "given their services" to Mr Stringer. Judge Welch said the investigation had concluded that Mr Stringer should be given a "final written warning" in relation to his "abuse" of the BBC's "social media policy" and "dismissed on notice" as a result of failing to the declare the "gift of the Audi A3". Mr Stringer had appealed but the "decision to dismiss" had been upheld. The tribunal heard how he felt he was "treated differently and unfairly" compared to Lineker, and others, as part of his "detriment claim" for "having made protected disclosures" - whistleblowing. Judge Welch said the tribunal found that Lineker - and others mentioned by Mr Stringer - were "not in comparable circumstances". She said the tribunal also concluded that the reason for dismissal was "conduct" not whistleblowing. The judge said the reason for the "decision to dismiss" was because bosses considered Mr Stringer had "committed gross misconduct" by accepting "gifts" of "expensive vehicles" without declaring them in accordance with BBC policies. "We are satisfied that the reason for the claimant's dismissal was conduct and that the protected disclosures formed no part of the dismissing officer's reasons for dismissal," she added. "We do not accept the claimant's assertion that the investigation was defective." She said the tribunal found that "summary dismissal" was "within the range of reasonable responses" open to the BBC. The judge said "all claims" were dismissed.

Yes 🦊👊🏼

Haha well as a Blackhawks fan I am livid we are having to pick 2nd It's the first time I believe that no team have moved up or down in the draft lottery! I think next season will be a more prosperous one where we can finish between 20th & 30th. Playoffs are not on the horizon but progress is happening at the United Centre. The Sharks are 2 seasons behind the Hawks, but you will have to go through these lean years. Remember you also have the 14th pick due to the Karlson trade to the Penguins. We also have the 20th Well it's official, Keefe is gone, tomorrow Leafs press conference will be interesting. They are all convinced they will be able to move Marner, but who will pick up his contract? I just can't stop thinking about the cannons behind the Dallas bench

It was implemented before last weekends games, I don't watch the MLS, but I would be interested to see the effects over time. I think it is at the very least an acknowledgement that the current laws need adjusting. I am also pleased that a "lesser traditional" league in comparison to European football is able to make these adjustments, as the more traditional league hopefully can follow suit if they are an overall success.

Off-Field Treatment Rule The Off-Field Treatment Rule allows medical professionals with time to assess and treat players off the field of play in a less pressurized environment. If a player with a suspected injury remains on the ground for more than 15 seconds, the referee will stop play and wave the medical crew onto the field to evaluate the player. When safe, the player will be removed from the field and remain off the field for a minimum of two minutes for further assessment and treatment. First implemented in MLS NEXT Pro midway through the 2022 season and continued through the entirety of the 2023 season, the Off-Field Treatment Rule has allowed medical staffs time to treat players, while also allowing match play to resume quickly. Exceptions to the Off-Field Treatment Rule include instances of potential head injury, goalkeeper injuries, serious medical events, and fouls resulting in yellow or red cards. Timed Substitution Rule Maximizing effective match time, the Timed Substitution Rule requires that a substituted player exit the field within 10 seconds. Failure to exit from any point on the field within the 10 seconds will cause the incoming player to wait for a 60-second holding period, before entering the game at the next stoppage. During the holding period and prior to the substitute entering, the team will play down a player. Exceptions to the rule include injury and goalkeeper substitutions. Enacted in MLS NEXT Pro during the 2023 season, 99.7% of the more than 3,200 substitutions were completed in 10 seconds or less. In-Stadium VAR Announcements VAR decisions will be explained and announced by the referee to fans in stadium and broadcast viewers at home.

New rules: Off-Field Treatment Rule The Off-Field Treatment Rule allows medical professionals with time to assess and treat players off the field of play in a less pressurized environment. If a player with a suspected injury remains on the ground for more than 15 seconds, the referee will stop play and wave the medical crew onto the field to evaluate the player. When safe, the player will be removed from the field and remain off the field for a minimum of two minutes for further assessment and treatment. First implemented in MLS NEXT Pro midway through the 2022 season and continued through the entirety of the 2023 season, the Off-Field Treatment Rule has allowed medical staffs time to treat players, while also allowing match play to resume quickly. Exceptions to the Off-Field Treatment Rule include instances of potential head injury, goalkeeper injuries, serious medical events, and fouls resulting in yellow or red cards. Timed Substitution Rule Maximizing effective match time, the Timed Substitution Rule requires that a substituted player exit the field within 10 seconds. Failure to exit from any point on the field within the 10 seconds will cause the incoming player to wait for a 60-second holding period, before entering the game at the next stoppage. During the holding period and prior to the substitute entering, the team will play down a player. Exceptions to the rule include injury and goalkeeper substitutions. Enacted in MLS NEXT Pro during the 2023 season, 99.7% of the more than 3,200 substitutions were completed in 10 seconds or less. In-Stadium VAR Announcements VAR decisions will be explained and announced by the referee to fans in stadium and broadcast viewers at home.

This is the start of a long process where there will be a separation of the bigger financial earning clubs and the rest. I'd happily see the richer clubs just go play in Europe. I'm not interested in any of them. They are killing the game and themselves they just don't realise it yet.

Jake Evans made his England u16 debut this week

Dream situation

Absolutely dreadful. Slow in possession going nowhere. Can't defend. It's like watching a Rodgers side. Difference is we are playing far poorer teams than last year.

I don't understand the interest in the topic. You all seem to be speculating, so you can critique one or more individuals, for their specific responsibilities. Just use the job titles they have, no need for speculation then, It's black and white. Yes there will be minor elements of Grey in some leaders roles, but that's normal, don't worry about that, do you really want to spend your time wondering what % responsibility some person has over something you can't, and will never control.

You have a point of view. Your entitled to it, I think you have valid points re the u21s. However I don't deal with club policy and I understand why the club has certain policy's for the younger ages. The best performing clubs have the richest owners and highly competent staff who recruit the best players. There is no reason why Leicester shouldn't be striving to be amongst the very best teams in the world. That's just an opinion again.

If I were in the fortunate position to be very well paid (in comparison to traditional work) to represent an iconic community organisation, at a game. I'd hope I'd have the perspective, to understand that earned adulation will come from my positive work on the pitch (& training), not from pretty much valueless social media posts that are here today, forgotten mostly forever. This is my honest opinion. I understand that everyone likes adulation, but lets really focus on what is going to make their potential a reality. I have not experienced a player complaining about such a topic. This isn't to suggest that it isn't considered, I just am not aware of it. Many academy players are on Instagram and Tik Tok so if you are that interested to see their highlights they are free to have their own social media, but then they accept this at their own risk. I would not expose a young player to this, but this is a personal opinion! I get many follow requests and LinkedIn invites and messages from such sources as players & agents willing to demonstrate their abilities, but I am only connected with people I personally know. I am uncertain if you are unhappy because the fanbase doesn't get more information about (some or all of) the academy teams? Or are you concerned about the players feeling unappreciated on social media (when compared with other academies)? I believe we should be more concerned about all of the effects! Positive or negative effects of social media posts! Its not all 100% positive as for every win there is a loss. How would this effect a player on either side of the social post? Can a young person be expected to handle overly positive or negative posts from adoring fans? We have seen with the tabloid press in the past how they build up and drop senior England players let alone children introduced to the lawless wild west of social media. You must understand that there are people employed by football clubs, whose roles are to consider such things. It isn't that there is a deliberate plot against having fans know the positives. There isn't a lack of interest in supporting the players. There are always going to be young people (children) who excel and can play at a high level before they are 18, we cannot stop them from fulfilling their potential just because they are under 18, so the Rooney's and Owens will get their chance earlier than the majority, but that's the reality of elite football. As I am sure we can agree these young players must be held to a lesser standard of expectations in such circumstances. Hence their exposure compared to the senior squad will be diminished. I know its not ideal for the keenest of fans, but if you have lots of information and therefore exposure of people under 18, that could be a welfare issue. The players do get all of their games recorded. They can access their performances. they can use this as a tool to understand their weak points and strengths. The club does a lot to aid development! The club wants all of the players to succeed! I see some of the better moments become a social media post for individual parents or players, this is their individual choice. Now why the under 21's are not as well publicised as some would like I am not able to answer! There can be younger players in this group. I don't think this is the reason! I believe that the club don't consider it is a major issue as some posters on here. Do the club still publish an article in each new matchday programme? Maybe they think this is enough, I don't know! To be honest I am really not that interested in how much an academy player is exposed to the fanbase before they are ready for first team football. What I can tell you, is that there are some phenomenally talented players currently within the academy, who project to be special! You however, must wait to see how they develop, as there are many permutations that will effect this projection (Injuries for example). I also can inform you that the under 18s were very disappointed not to have beaten a very good Manchester City side. There was & is a belief that we should have and can beat them.

I am just referring to the u18 and younger age groups, as they were the ages being moaned about not having coverage yesterday.

Maybe so. However it's just the tip of an information iceburg. We can think about the what ifs... But you'll be there a lifetime. Once again, the club wouldn't benefit so there is no value in it at all. If we lived in a perfect world, and all our intentions were pure as just wanting to know the result, celebrate the positives... Then great. But sadly there are a spectrum of people, with a spectrum of interests. Where can you draw that line? The law says a child is any person under 18. That's the line for the club.

Did I write this? I wrote NOTHING is more important than the children's welfare to the club. If it upsets a minority of fans... No the club doesn't care, and rightly so. I don't understand why this would be a point of contention? The club must consider all of the possibilities ,not just the positives.

What's the upside? There isn't one for the club, so you won't get any information.

My best guess is that the clubs duty of care to children, is of higher importance than anything else.

If Becker didn't go up for that corner. Collymore not getting beat up by Benjamin.

It was 5-2 when I wrote that Crazy game x5 5 on 3 for the wild. Canucks still look great.