davieG

Striking a balance and taking a chance. Do we have a full eligible squad, if not then that's the problem.

I guess it gives the 1st team players a chance to jell as they've hardly played more than a few games together.

I can't see this ending well

Apparently he was going to be in the squad for the Plymouth game but took a knock

So he's only interested after we or the women win.

https://www.londoncitylionesses.com/post/match-preview-leicester-city-vs-london-city-lionesses-1 A new competition begins tonight as we head to Meadow Lane to face Leicester City in our opening fixture of the 2026/27 Subway Players Cup, with kick-off at 7:30pm under the lights in Nottingham. And wherever you are in the world, you can watch every minute. Tonight’s game will be streamed LIVE globally on our official YouTube channel. Make sure you're subscribed to not miss a minute.

London City Lionesses London City Lionesses vs Leicester City in Subway Players Cup (September 23) Titles are generated by AI from Meta It's 𝗠𝗔𝗧𝗖𝗛𝗗𝗔𝗬 in the Subway Players Cup Under the lights against Leicester City 7:30pm BST Live streamed exclusively on the London City Lionesses YouTube channel

Leicester City receive warning as King Power presented with £1.5 billion proposal | Leicestershire Live Jamie Gardner Press Association Chief Sports Reporter 11:01, 23 Sep 2026 EFL clubs, including Leicester City, have been warned they could be kept waiting up to two years for a new financial settlement from the Premier League if they choose to trigger the Independent Football Regulator's 'backstop' powers. EFL executives are in ongoing talks with their counterparts in the top flight over a 'New Deal' for the English game. Documents seen by the Press Association – which remain subject to change as negotiations remain ongoing – indicate an increase in solidarity funding of more than £1.5billion over the next 10 years compared to current levels. Details of the Premier League's proposal, which was approved by its clubs in July, were presented to the 72 EFL clubs last week. Within those documents came guidance around the timescales involved should EFL clubs ultimately decide not to accept the Premier League's offer and instead invoke the IFR's 'backstop' powers to impose a settlement. The EFL told its clubs that process could take between one and two years to reach a resolution and that the outcome was "difficult to predict". "That said, the IFR has very clear objectives in relation to sustainability," the presentation to clubs states. Both leagues will also be conscious of the expected publication next month of the regulator's 'State of the Game' review, which will provide a wide-ranging analysis of the financial health of the English game, including a view on the impact of parachute payments. The Premier League's current 'New Deal' proposal includes a commitment to reduce parachute payments to its relegated clubs by five per cent across six years, according to the documents. The offer also makes provision for changes to the cost control measures EFL clubs are subject to. The deal includes a condition that 15 per cent of solidarity funds clubs receive be set aside for infrastructure projects, while it also makes provisions for the creation of a £20m 'lifeboat fund' for clubs that enter administration. It also foresees stronger partnership between the leagues on a number of issues, including an agreed position on the Saturday 3pm blackout, the structure of the Carabao Cup and the format of the EFL Trophy, which is now under new sponsorship with the American sandwich brand Jersey Mike's having agreed a five-year deal as title sponsor. EFL clubs are expected to gather again over the next fortnight for further discussions on the proposals. The EFL and the Premier League have been approached for comment.

New walkway to link city centre squares and provide new green space Designs for a new walkway that would link Leicester’s Green Dragon Square with St Martin’s Square, and complete the route from Town Hall Square, have been revealed by the city council. More here - https://www.leicestermedia.online/post/new-walkway-to-link-city-centre-squares-and-provide-new-green-space?fbclid=IwY2xjawUgpxpwZG9mAWV4dG4DYWVtAjEwAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkEDIyMjAzOTE3ODgyMDA4OTIAAR4gBVSeCLoGju44M_lZd6G_1s513ddwWmxmnOCwczkdsP0M0oHLxKHoPmORXw_aem_rNlbHh3m3wIHMm2-bNMlmw

Leicester City Football Club Debuts for three of our Academy graduates Will Lawrence Tommy Neale Lorenz Hutchinson

Maybe I'm wrong but I see thousands of kids playing football regularly and I can't believe they would rather be stuck at home like every other night rather than A night out with mum and or dad at a live football match with the opportunity of drinks and food and a chance to let loose with some vocals.

I disagree it really doesn't matter what level the game was it was guaranteed to have plenty of 1st teamers in there and a night match at the stadium would leave many a first time youngster in awe. Check some of the posts in here and their reference to FNF which was just the reserves plus a few youngsters plus some trialists and they drew much bigger gates than last night. I actually think the club, on principle will not look back on any good idea pre KP and use it. for them History is bunk unless it enables them to stick their name next to 1884.

LCFC v Fulham U21s EFL Trophy It would seem the Official Attendance was 1706. Surely with say £6 tickets and free for kids they would have got a bigger crowd especially as it was a 7pm KO. They'd more or less only need to double the adult attendance to make the same money and they'd still only need to open the West Stand What a plus it would have been to have the stadium with loads of kids, future adult fans probably seeing their first live game History tells us via FNF that that is entirely feasible

Various Date - Prescription drugs. Used for spiking and sexually assaulting/raping women and probably men.

Your Leicester · Follow Fresh Concept Pics for Walnut Street in Leicester 42 new apartments proposed New renders have emerged from Staniforth Architects for a major infill scheme on Walnut Street! Positioned close to DMU and Leicester Royal Infirmary, the project aims to transform a fragmented site along the street: 5-Storey Scheme: A modern residential block featuring 42 high-quality apartments. Ground Floor Workspace: Dedicated commercial/office space at street level. Outdoor Space: Includes a private courtyard garden and an upper roof terrace for residents. Urban Design: Structured using architectural breaks and rhythmic facade panels to complement the surrounding brickwork. With multiple infill developments popping up around this corridor, the area around Walnut Street and the hospital continues to see steady investment.

Yeah was missed in the 2nd half.

As I said in the match thread he's looking more like O'Horrror than O'Hora

He’s just done it again forward pass straight to Fulham player

O’Hora’s becoming more O’Horror

No I don't but i've got to the stage where I have no confidence in anything I read on the internet even the stuff I believe in which can also be over stated. Although I have and still do have a big interest in new inventions, discoveries and technology, although a lot is now beyond my comprehension I have lost trust it that it will benefit mankind as much as it should as it so often is used for bad. But i guess that's always been the case but the bad now seems to have a greater impact.

Jersey Budd singing When you're smiling

Tee Hee!

Wind Energy's Absurd · Follow Yesterday, Allison Pearson had an article in The Telegraph - 'Net zero is a national suicide pact' with a sub-heading 'I implore Andy Burnham: please find just 30 minutes to watch this devastating analysis of Britain’s energy policy by the former head of MI6'. That's Sir Richard Dearlove whose lecture we posted last week. Burnham has been bumping his gums on net zero. Allison Pearson says: 𝐀𝐧𝐝𝐲 𝐁𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐡𝐚𝐦 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐭𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐧𝐞𝐭 𝐳𝐞𝐫𝐨 𝐛𝐲 𝟐𝟎𝟓𝟎. “𝐈 𝐚𝐦 𝐝𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝… 𝐈 𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐢𝐭𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧.” 𝐇𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐠𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐌𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐭𝐨𝐬𝐡, 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐰𝐨𝐨 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐯𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐭 𝐏𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐲-𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. The PM might be new; the zealotry isn't. And neither is the disregard for security. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/.../net-zero-is-a.../... 'Greenhouse gas effect, global warming, climate change, global heating (a new one on me), climate emergency, net zero. The terms for the forthcoming apocalypse change every few years. Who now remembers the briefly famous “hole in the ozone layer” caused when an entire generation of teenage girls tried to copy Farrah Fawcett’s iconic 1970s feathered hair and used several trillion cans of hairspray to unsuccessfully (in my case anyway) keep the flicked-back sides in place? Did the hole heal when girls moved on to imitating Jennifer Aniston’s “The Rachel” cut, which could be achieved without assistance from aerosols? Admittedly, Farrah’s Fringe is not a scientifically proven explanation for the phenomenon, but, if you ask me, it’s every bit as plausible as some of the theories accounting for changes in what we used to call “the weather”. Anyway, after almost 20 years of hysterical banging on about the need to reach “net zero” by 2050 lest 70 million Britons start to resemble the crusty bits in a fish-fryer, a cross-party House of Commons committee this week recommended the Government stop using the phrase because it had become “toxic among the public”. Well, hallelujah! Was this a rare and welcome outbreak of sanity among the climate cultists who were finally acknowledging that decarbonisation and running a successful G7 economy are not, given the present state of technology, compatible? Don’t get your hopes up, please. The committee of MPs suggested finding a new phrase for the same old nonsense. Because “net zero” no longer had a positive image with the public and consensus over the transition to clean energy had broken down amid “misinformation from sceptics”. Gosh, cults are remarkably impervious to reason, aren’t they? If “net zero” has become toxic, it’s because, despite an overwhelming media consensus designed to stifle debate, the public has managed to pick up pieces of information from those pesky sceptics. People can see for themselves the effect of net zero in their vertiginous energy bills. They can see that the cost of electricity (among the highest in the world) is destroying manufacturing (Denby Pottery, established 1809, is only the latest casualty). They also realise that reducing 0.8 per cent of the world’s CO2 – the UK’s puny contribution – is going to have no effect on the climate, not when our competitors are busy building coal-fired power stations and increasing their emissions like billy-o. As for paying Norway £20bn a year for oil and gas when we could drill our own in neighbouring North Sea fields, has any nation ever conspired so successfully in its own downfall? Consumers, it turns out, don’t care to be patronised by scientifically illiterate MPs, mouthing the approved dogma, when people like me have been pointing out that green taxes are slapped on bills to subsidise Ed Miliband’s renewables cronies. As for what the Commons’ committee calls “tangible wins” such as new jobs – there are, indeed, thousands of green jobs. Unfortunately, most of them are in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) where, unsurprisingly, the UK’s 2050 net zero target is hugely popular. “Never interrupt your enemy when he is in the middle of making a mistake.” Sir Richard Dearlove quoted that acrid line in his devastating lecture for the Global Warming Policy Foundation (of which I am a board member) in London on Wednesday night. In “Energy Security: Blowing in the Wind”, the former head of MI6, who is one of our best geopolitical brains, outlined in excruciating detail the epic folly of British climate policy, which has failed to give sufficient weight to the strategic vulnerabilities created by dependence on foreign manufacturing, imported components and a national grid that is increasingly at the mercy of whether the sun shines or the wind blows (but not too hard!). The implications for national security are dire. Deindustrialisation, Dearlove pointed out, has not only led to the closure of vast tracts of our manufacturing capability. In the event of an emergency, we have lost much of the ability to rebuild our own energy infrastructure. (“Uncertain access to equipment and spares – for example, generators and transformers – is a graver and more chronic danger than a temporary shortage of gas.”) Should we experience the blackouts many experts predict for this winter, it won’t be the brief, homework-by-candlelight affair some of us remember from childhood. During the three-day week in 1974, thanks to the large interruptible load, a shortage could be absorbed by factories rather than households, but that ability has been lost in the reckless rush to decarbonisation. After a major blackout in the Iberian peninsula last year, it took approximately 23 hours for Spain’s electricity grid to be fully declared back to normal. There seems little hope that a Britain diminished by the destruction of its power stations (and the loss of its ability to make virgin steel at Port Talbot) in the cause of net zero would be able to rescue a similar situation that speedily. “We have very little industry left to protect and we cannot rebuild non-existent industries which lie in foreign jurisdictions,” was the former spy chief’s bleak assessment. The well-informed audience was clearly shocked as Dearlove painted a humiliating picture of the UK having to join a queue for materials and components (“large-scale transformers ordered today now take two years to arrive”), often from “the very country which the director general of MI5 has identified as the most serious threat to Britain’s national security”. The degree to which the United Kingdom has become China’s bitch should horrify us all. Dearlove would not use such vulgar language, of course, although his angry disbelief was felt in fact after damning fact; at one point, he did answer a question with a pithy: “We’re screwed.” Asked whether China could turn off the lights in the lecture theatre where we sat, he said they probably could, and he suggested PRC spies had infiltrated climate-change groups, just as Russian spies penetrated CND during the Cold War. I urge you to watch Dearlove’s powerful lecture for yourself. All I can say is he left those of us in his audience badly shaken. Richard Tice, deputy leader of Reform UK (he coined “net stupid zero”), is normally an upbeat fellow, but he confessed: “I am really anxious. It’s unreal how stupid our leaders have been for decades.” Should there be significant power cuts this winter, Tice said Reform “will demand a general election and criminal prosecutions for negligence and malfeasance in public office”. Both Reform and the Conservatives have sensibly said they will scrap Theresa May’s 2050 target made legally binding by the Climate Change Act 2008. Maybe then arguably the greatest act of national self-harm in the history of these islands can begin to be repaired. Except Andy Burnham said this week that the country must fully commit itself to reaching net zero by 2050. “I am determined that we meet the commitment on which Labour was elected… I want Britain to believe in itself again.” His ignorance is staggering. The Prime Minister was talking dangerous tosh, timed to woo Green voters in the forthcoming Holborn and St Pancras by-election. For the same party-before-country reason, Andy has also postponed a decision to approve the development of the Jackdaw gas field in the North Sea. “I urge our leading politicians to take very careful note,” Sir Richard Dearlove said. “We are not the victims of a conspiracy to make us vulnerable; we have quite casually done this to ourselves. We have, as a nation, negligently wandered close to a cliff edge and the adversaries I have described stand ready to help us over it; and the fragility of the present international order enhances the risk.” Are you listening to the man who has forgotten more about national security than you will ever know, Prime Minister? You really should. The phrase “net zero” has not been discredited by “misinformation”, but by reality. Net zero will not happen by 2050, but the doomed pursuit of that target will cause untold economic damage, give comfort to our enemies and discomfort our own people. Don’t change the phrase, change the crazy policy. The cliff edge is frighteningly close.' Thoughts?

Everybody's keeping Shum