hornyhollthefox123 Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Kitchandro I don't know where to start. Yes we MIGHT have gone up without them but the fact is they played a huge part in us actually being promoted. They have paid off all our debts and bought the stadium for us. Worth well over £100million that they have contributed. And MC Prussian has said also, and I'm not trying to be biased but our owners are fantastic to the fans and club alike. On top of all that investment without stadium and debts, don't forget they also paid £5 for every supporter for to away games this year, bought everyone a pint at the last game which takes me to my next point.. You say we are overcharged? At least do your research. Football in the premier league is unfortunately expensive but yet again our owners have been pretty good regarding this! We were the cheapest day out in the premier league last year when you include a match ticket , pie and a pint, so you can't argue against that. And also a tiny bit of gold on our kit? Give me a break..
davieG Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 As far back as I can remember we've only ever been as good as the amount of money various owners have given or loaned the club and most of them have been loans. I don't idolise owners some have been good some have been bad but all of them are there because they've wanted to be and they've all gained by being 'owners' not necessarily cash wise but by the kudos of owning all or part of Leicester City Football Club. As for the present owners i think we can say with little argument that we were going nowhere whilst in the Championship with the ever increasing debt, certainly never reducing debt of the stadium. I can see no conceivable way that we would have got promoted other than with a massive almost unheard of slice of luck. On the King Power Stadium name sadly it's the way of modern football to squeeze ever penny you can out of a club's status, mainly to pay the ever increasing players salaries that many complain of and yet still want better players costing more than those we already have. I'm not entirely sure why it's any more unacceptable than the Walkers Stadium. Re the Flag, the stadium is in effect the 'home' of our owners whilst they are in England so surely they are entitled to decorate it any way the choose frankly i'm more pissed off by the 'Sky Blue' frontage agreed to by our previous owners.
gerrytaggart Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 I like it. When I look at it it makes me think of the Thailand flag.
HitchinFox Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Why is it that we have to have a Thai flag outside our ground.....Its like they have planted it there stating we have been conquered. There is no stars and stripes outside Old Trafford or Anfield....No Russian flag outside Stamford Bridge or any other foreign flags flying at English football clubs that have become foreign owners new play things......So why us ?????? Yes I know that most City fans think the owners are fab and all that, but it just gripes the hell out of me that our stadium is named after a Thai Duty free business and that statement of a flag is outside..... 'The King Power' .... do me a favour ... 'Filbert Way' please and take that dam flag down. Which one's dad are you then? Can't be Pearson's, obviously, so Mr Hopper or Mr Smith?
JAPANFOX1 Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 I guess with my own icon I should not be posting on this BRITISH forum despite the fact that my words exist across national boundaries in cyberspace. Concern over flags and singing anthems is generally the preoccupation of the insecure, the uneducated and the narrow minded. How can a blue, red and white cloth hanging from a pole really make someone so irrate?
BlueSi13 Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Not too fussed about the Thai flag as long as the Union flag flies alongside it. However I believe that is required by law. If a foreign states flag is flown from a pole then a Union flag of equal size has to be flown alongside it. From what I can tell the Thai flag is larger than the Union flag...which is illegal...just saying.
yorkie1999 Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Not too fussed about the Thai flag as long as the Union flag flies alongside it. However I believe that is required by law. If a foreign states flag is flown from a pole then a Union flag of equal size has to be flown alongside it. From what I can tell the Thai flag is larger than the Union flag...which is illegal...just saying. I prefer the Thai flag, it hasn't got the saltire on it.
melrose Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Anyone who is crying over a Thai flag is just being a racist **** Some people jump at any tiny excuse to shoe horn the racist card in!
Sir Fynwy Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Not too fussed about the Thai flag as long as the Union flag flies alongside it. However I believe that is required by law. If a foreign states flag is flown from a pole then a Union flag of equal size has to be flown alongside it. From what I can tell the Thai flag is larger than the Union flag...which is illegal...just saying. When did you make this law up? Here is real governmental guidance https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/15438/flying_flags_guide.pdf
foxes_rule1978 Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Not too fussed about the Thai flag as long as the Union flag flies alongside it. However I believe that is required by law. If a foreign states flag is flown from a pole then a Union flag of equal size has to be flown alongside it. From what I can tell the Thai flag is larger than the Union flag...which is illegal...just saying. What
Stadt Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 It's actually because they're planning to make LE2 (is it LE1 or LE2? I feel like I should know this?) an exclave of Thailand
Hungry Hungry Fox Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 There could've been Thai VIP's visiting Some people jump at any tiny excuse to shoe horn the racist card in! The post does come across as a tad racist tbf
bovril Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 I think people need to look up the definition of "racist".
Monsell1976 Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Keep our club well run, and successful and the monks and flag are welcome to stay, it's not like they have invaded the city by force.
melrose Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 There could've been Thai VIP's visiting The post does come across as a tad racist tbf Not to a normal person!
Frank to be Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Of course the OP is racist. He's basically saying "don't want any ov that Asian muck in ingurland" Plenty of English knuckledraggers are still strongly racist, mainly disguising it as Nationalism. What other type of person would get annoyed by a flag? I mean, a flag.
Harry - LCFC Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Of course the OP is racist. He's basically saying "don't want any ov that Asian muck in ingurland" Plenty of English knuckledraggers are still strongly racist, mainly disguising it as Nationalism. What other type of person would get annoyed by a flag? I mean, a flag. He also states that he likes the fact that the American and Russian flags aren't flown outside Old Trafford and Stamford Bridge. Does he hold racist views against those people too? Looking at the 2nd and 3rd lines of the post it seems more likely that the OP's is a nationalist opinion rather than a racist one.
mugshot Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 I dont see any issue with the Thai flag flying above the KP, Thai owned company that has proven to be great owners that care about the club and supporters...we are proud in our club and many of us our country (they have the club and country flag up too) and they are proud of where they are from so allow them to fly their flag too! On a side note: for all we know it might be part of the Tourism Authority of Thailand sponsorship deal and not even related to Top and Vichai.
LanguedocFox Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Of course the OP is racist. He's basically saying "don't want any ov that Asian muck in ingurland" Plenty of English knuckledraggers are still strongly racist, mainly disguising it as Nationalism. What other type of person would get annoyed by a flag? I mean, a flag. 1. The OP has only made two posts, including starting this thread. 2. He's not responded to any of the subsequent 90+ posts. 3. He claims to be based in Athens. He's either a WUM or a Florist Troll. Close the thread
yorkie1999 Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 1. The OP has only made two posts, including starting this thread. 2. He's not responded to any of the subsequent 90+ posts. 3. He claims to be based in Athens. He's either a WUM or a Florist Troll. Close the thread I think he has. Someone needs to start checking ip's....
foxes_rule1978 Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 I think he has. Someone needs to start checking ip's.... no one is this whole thread agreed at all with him... just ridiculous and does seem like someone who is trolling
BlueSi13 Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 When did you make this law up? Here is real governmental guidance https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/15438/flying_flags_guide.pdf No need to be sensitive, I said I BELIEVED this was the law. It would appear that I was referring to protocol instead, here is what the Flag Institute has to say... "When British national flags are flown with the flags of other nations each flag should be the same size (or have the same width – the measurement from top to bottom) and should fly from a separate flagpole of the same height.[3] The UK’s flag shape of 3:5 works well with nearly all other nations’ flags and it is recommended to use these proportions if a standard size is required for all the flags in a display.[4]" http://www.flaginstitute.org/wp/british-flags/flying-flags-in-the-united-kingdom/british-flag-protocol/
Danno Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 Imagine caring about a bit of cloth with a few colours on it
Strokes Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 They could wrap the entire stadium in the Thai flag for me and I wouldn't be bothered. It'd make it a bit tricky to get in or out, I'd probably be a little cross.
Sir Fynwy Posted 6 June 2015 Posted 6 June 2015 No need to be sensitive, I said I BELIEVED this was the law. It would appear that I was referring to protocol instead, here is what the Flag Institute has to say... "When British national flags are flown with the flags of other nations each flag should be the same size (or have the same width – the measurement from top to bottom) and should fly from a separate flagpole of the same height.[3] The UK’s flag shape of 3:5 works well with nearly all other nations’ flags and it is recommended to use these proportions if a standard size is required for all the flags in a display.[4]" http://www.flaginstitute.org/wp/british-flags/flying-flags-in-the-united-kingdom/british-flag-protocol/ The flag institute gives advice based on what? I'd take the government advice over a half arsed self appointed advisory group.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.