Sampson

Ndidi isn’t “roadtesred and successful” recently though is he? He was excellent 4 years ago, but was pretty awful in the last 2.5 seasons in the PL, and you can say at best he’s been inconsistent in his new role so far, having a couple of very good performances and a couple of very poor ones. My point was Casedei is untested and I’m not convinced by Ndidi in his new role, Casedei as it stands is essentially a wild card who could go either way, like I said I think I’d prefer him if he turns out to be good (which we don’t know yet), than persisting with a player who’s been crap for us for a long time now playing out of position.

Fair play. Still can’t say I’ve been convinced by him in this more forward playing role though. Think I’d still prefer Praet there when he’s fit again or maybe Casedei if he turns out to be any good.

Of course the public sector should offer fair trials to all, of course the tax payers should foot the bill to all, and that includes Khalife. What kind of country do you want to live in that doesn’t offer this? The right to a fair trial should be absolute. As should be the right to a publicly funded lawyer or legal expert. Once you make a single exception then you’ve created a new case law and legal loophole which is there for eternity allowing the government to prosecute and lock up whoever they like without trial. If you want to live in a society based on rules and laws that apply to individuals and protect them against people who break these laws to their harm rather than the whims of dictators or monarchs to do what they like to other individuals then I don’t see how you can possibly be annoyed by this.

The rules specifically state you can’t be offside from a corner, throw in or goal kick though.

With regards to VAR and offside it shouldn’t actually measure “the moment it left his boot”, it should measure the moment it made contact with his boot while performing the pass, the offside rule is based on the first point of contact. One of the big problems with stopping VAR frame by frame is that VAR often displays a frame well after the ball has left the boot. The reality is the technology is not currently good enough to measure the correct moment the offside should be measured from and I’ve seen several instances where the wrong frame has been used: there was one this weekend with the Villa game. It’s just another reason why “VAR should be used for offsides as its objective” is a nonsense argument.

Drinkwater was the far superior player to James in 2013-14. He was the best player in the Championship and won both our fans and players POTS award by a considerable margin with Vardy coming a distant second. James was ok in 2014-15, better than Drinkwater for sure but that’s more due to Drinkwater having a poor season, but King was also better than either that season and it was King who played alongside Cambiasso for most of the great escape run. James was a good player for us in the Championship, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying he was crap or anything, but he gets really overrated by some fans as though he was some great forgotten player who had his moment in the title winning side robbed. People who genuinely try to make out he was better than Drinkwater are just nuts. I definitely wouldn’t call Matty James a “legend”, good player for a season or two, sure, but certainly should be nowhere near the same level of iconic status at Leicester as King or Pearson.

If you take in the angle of lines of the 6 yard box and the 12 yard change in colour on the grass, looks like his head if offside as he leans forward to me. I think it’s more likely than not that VAR would’ve found him offside. Of course this kind of margin that doesn’t affect play is not what the offside rule was invented for and I’m glad we don’t have VAR spending 5 minutes analysing these close calls anymore

To be a pedant, a couple of the Ipswich Town players under Alf Ramsey also won all 3 in the 50s and 60s. Ramsey also the only manager to win all 3 divisions with the same club in England

You think it’s weird to have a bit of sentimentality for a player like King to score if we win anyway? I remember Steve Claridge scoring for Millwall in a game we otherwise won 4-1 and the whole ground applauded when it was announced Claridge scored. It was a great moment. Of course we want to win first and foremost, but there’s nothing wrong with wanting to see a player like King or a manager like Pearson doing well. There’s more to supporting a football club than just obsessively caring about winning by as big a margin as possible and nothing else, having a connection with certain players or managers is a big part of the community and social aspect of the game.

This game really shows the difference between the PL and Championship. You really don’t get punished for your mistakes at this level to the same degree. Feel like we’d have lost this kind of game 3-1 last season. Not complaining mind, just an observation

It would also make him outright Leicester’s most successful ever player, as he’d have 1 more trophy/promotion than Schmeichel or Morgan.

It’s an interesting debate with Albrighton vs Guppy. Guppy used to get a lot of stick (often unfairly) in his time and seems to be one of those players who gets more and more appreciated and more and more talked about as time goes on. Same with Albrighton in many ways, has got written off many times over the years (also often unfairly) and often answered those critics. But I feel like he’s one of those players that will get more appreciation over the next 10-20 years like Guppy has. Especially with his Champions League goals vs Sevilla and Copenhagen which will probably go down as 2 of the most iconic goals in the club’s history in years to come. One could argue Guppy had a higher peak sustained over a season or two but Albrighton had greater longevity and more iconic individual moments and better individual performances. I think if you did this same list in 15 years time, Albrighton would be #3 after Mahrez and Weller.

I mean come on… some of those names played a couple of seasons for us in the second tier and that’s it. Some others are squad players in relegation battling sides and clearly just reaching Even without some of the older players that were before my time, there’s no credible argument that the likes of Steve Kember, John Farrington, Bobby Smith were genuinely as good as players for us as Harvey Barnes. I mean Kember was an ok player for a season or so in a bottom half side and Smith was great for us in that season we got promoted but struggled a bit in the top flight, claiming either were as good as Barnes is either reaching or nostalgia baiting to the extreme.

It’s not really though is it? I know recent players don’t have the nostalgia bonus in these debates and some people haven’t got over last season’s relegation yet, but even without that, no one is going to be able to list 20 wingers for us better than Harvey Barnes.

Eh. I guess I’ll bite and I’ll say it before someone else does - Maddison is not a winger and if you’re including him here to try and shoehorn him in because he played a few games on the wing last season then putting him behind Barnes is just silly. I get some people seem to have Maddison down as public enemy number 1 for some spurious reason but he was clearly a better player for us than Barnes. And if the argument is “yeah but we’re only considering his games as a winger not a number 10”, then he shouldn’t be in the top 12 at all as he only played there for about half a season and always drifted inside anyway.

But some people’s opinions absolutely are more worthy, the survival of not only democracy but the entire human race depends on that undisputed fact, that’s the point. Populist is a dirty word because the point is that it’s appealing to anti-establishment or even anti-politics rhetoric for the sake of being anti-establishment or for the purpose of disenfranchising the voter. No one uses “populism” to mean something as simple as “speaking to popular opinion”, that’s not how the word is used in general discourse. The point is it is to say “the establishment/another group is bad, we speak for you, the everyday Briton” without actually offering an alternative, its scapegoating for the most part. Building up the EU as “the liberal elite” and that it was suppressing what the UK government was the go-to Tory scapegoat for about 20 years. Now that’s been and gone and proven to be quackery, immigrants and “the boats” are the new populist appeal, to say that “the establishment wants liberals to “invade” this country at the harm of you, the everyday Briton”. Populism is lethal to democracy not the other way round, because it inherently tries to corrode away the checks and balances that make democracy function such as the separation of powers (commons and lords in uk, but house and senate or prime minister and President in other democracies. It inherently says the average person knows more than scientific research or the opinions of highly experienced experts. It’s not “tough”, some people’s opinions absolutely are more worthy than others. A highly trained and experienced scientist, AI researcher or economist absolutely does have a more worthy opinion on climate change or the dangers and regulation of AI or how to control inflation for example than some YouTuber calling them the elite and claiming the speak for the people based on 10 minutes of googling. These opinions should not be given equivalency. Populism isn’t about solely talking to the people’s wants and needs, it’s about setting up some phantom “establishment” up as the bogeyman to create a an inherently evil common enemy and claiming to speak for “the everyday person” as an inherently pure good. We would have referendums on climate change or AI or economic ways to deal with inflation in a pure, direct democracy, but that kind of direct democracy would probably wipe out society within 20 years because most people (understandably) don’t have the time or energy to fully comprehend these issues and all it takes is endlessly repeating a 3-word slogan by some guy to claim he speaks for the people and suddenly he’s got an equal voice to someone with years of background in scientific training. That’s why we live in a representative democracy in which the idea is we elect specialised experts to deal with these issues for us, that’s what representative democracy is and we have checks and balances which provide safeguards against that kind of populist direct democracy which populism wants to erode away.

Exactly. I was actually the opposite, didn’t want to vote Corbyn and wasn’t a fan of his, but was forced to vote for him because the alternatives were so bad and The Tories put out an unelectable, populist idiot in the case of Johnson. Hated that Corbyn was so wishy-washy on Brexit and hated some of his silly foreign policy views that always felt like anti-western = good, pro-western = bad, wanted to vote LibDems in an ideal world to stop Brexit as it was clear at the time and still is what a ridiculous choice it was for the UK. But the Tories had clearly already lurched into right-wing populism by 2019 and were gutting the party of anyone remotely competent in favour of populist loons like Rees-Mogg, Patel and Braverman. Crazy to me it took until Truss was in power for people to see the traditional conservatives were no longer in charge of their party and the 2016 Brexit vote had allowed the loony fringes to take over the party. It was becoming clear during the latter stages of May’s reign.

Stanley Matthews - 1932-33 season to 1961-62 season. 29 years With the same club Stoke City too. Though in 2 different spells at the club

Eh he absolutely was. He was amongst the top scorers in Europe for that 6 months (like anlongside Messi and Lewandowski Le el) and was carrying us as a team. No one is saying he’s been consistently amazing for us and some fans absolutely do overrate him, but you’re going ridiculously over the top and swinging too far the other way to make a point. To say he’s never delivered for us and to try and play down that he was only “decent” for that half season when he was clearly our best player, and then to play down his massive role in the clubs second greatest ever achievement is just kind of sad. Especially with the needless and over the top endless laughing emojis is obviously completely disingenuous and just makes you look bitter and detract from your argument when there are genuine arguments to have on your side that we should’ve cashed in.

No but he did score the goals that won us the quarter finals and semi finals. He was also hands down our best player in the 2nd half of that season

Simpson and Fuchs surely?

That’s definitely a retroactive opinion . James missed about 1/3rd of the season in the Championship winning season through injury and our results or performances didn’t suffer when King filled in for him. Drinkwater was universally regarded as the much better than the 2 and the best midfielder in the Championship in our Championship winning season. Most Leicester fans were stunned Drinkwater didn’t win Championship player of the season at the time. Not saying James was crap, he was a good player, but he categorically wasn’t as good as Drinkwater.

My memory is King actually started a lot of those games in the great escape run in over both James and Drinkwater and played really well but I may be wrong

Vic Reeves would be fantastic, would love to see him do it. He has heart problems though so not sure if he’d be able to do some of the more physical tasks. Would just love to see Vic and Bob re-unite on something in general.

What? Where did I claim he was? I was talking about their position. Weller or Stringfellow were not strikers, they shouldn’t be on this list. My point was if you’re including the likes of Weller and Stringfellow then you need to be including the likes of Mahrez and Barnes too as wide forwards