Guest Col city fan Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 You reckon? You think because the owners know the Thai King that proves they sacked Pearson for no reason at all? The longer inkley goes on the more bizarre his theories become. I can only assume people are only skim reading his really long posts. I am skim reading them. Talk about theorising!
The Doctor Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 You reckon? You think because the owners know the Thai King that proves they sacked Pearson for no reason at all? The longer inkley goes on the more bizarre his theories become. I can only assume people are only skim reading his really long posts. That's really not what he's saying though now is it. What he's saying is that the suggestions that there's no way the owners could be anything less than stellar people, therefore Pearson must be at fault, really doesn't stand up - as he's made clear in his posts: And you're fully aware that I'm not using it to show that they were wrong to sack Pearson, but rather to indicate that - just as there are public criticisms of Pearson out there, from which you have formulated an entire theory and presented it as fact - there are also question marks which you could apply to our owners, both in terms of the climate in which their wealth was accumulated, and in terms of their management of the club. It's a perfectly reasonable point when some people have turned the debate into a 'who would you trust the most?' contest. Yourself included.
BlueSi13 Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 Watching Inckley have Franks pants down over and over again is somehow rather enjoyable, you'd think Frank would just pack in replying. Got to respect Frank to be's dogged resistance really. But hats off to inckley fox, he's been on devastating form in this thread.
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 Pearson is still "very angry" about his dismissal, I'm led to believe.
Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 You reckon? You think because the owners know the Thai King that proves they sacked Pearson for no reason at all? The longer inkley goes on the more bizarre his theories become. I can only assume people are only skim reading his really long posts. I'm not saying i agree or disagree with him just he's debating his points with enthusiasm, evidence and basically being quite eloquent. The replies to them are quite the opposite.
katieakita Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 Pearson is still "very angry" about his dismissal, I'm led to believe. Thanks Geoff, Judging by some of the comments on FT many are still angry here as well. PS As a journalist cant you get a banning order on IndyKalia ffs
Carl the Llama Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 Pearson is still "very angry" about his dismissal, I'm led to believe. I suppose it would be asking too much to request you to shed more light on the why of it all?
yorkie1999 Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 I suppose it would be asking too much to request you to shed more light on the why of it all?he wanted to sit in on his sons meeting and they wouldn't let him, so he threw a wobbly and they sacked him.
Webbo Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 That's really not what he's saying though now is it. What he's saying is that the suggestions that there's no way the owners could be anything less than stellar people, therefore Pearson must be at fault, really doesn't stand up - as he's made clear in his posts: No one is saying that the owners are saints, nobody is saying that Pearson is the worst person on earth. We all know what Pearson is like, how many people he's fell out with. We know how the owners have stood by him when they've had ample opportunity to sack in the last year, they've backed him with money during this transfer window. But apparently our owners, who have never knowingly done this club or it's fans a bad turn, are involved in an evil plot to sack a totally innocent man for reasons that nobody has ever stated. It's laughable. This is the statement from the club; The Board of Directors recognises the success Nigel has helped to bring to Leicester City during his two spells in charge of the Club, particularly during the last three and a half years. However, it has become clear to the Club that fundamental differences in perspective exist between us. Regrettably, the Club believes that the working relationship between Nigel and the Board is no longer viable. Leicester City’s owners, Vichai and Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha, and the Board of Directors would like to place on record their thanks to Nigel for the considerable contribution he has made during his time with the Club and wish him well in the future. Khun Vichai and Khun Top remain wholly committed to the Club’s long-term development and to on going investment in a squad that will continue to be competitive in the Premier League. We trust that the Club’s supporters will recognise that the owners have always acted with the best interests of the Club at heart and with the Club’s long-term future as their greatest priority. Craig Shakespeare and Steve Walsh will take charge of first team duties while the Club begins its recruitment of a new manager. There will be What is so hard to believe about that?
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 I suppose it would be asking too much to request you to shed more light on the why of it all? A lot of journalists are digging and a lot of journalists are hitting a brick wall.
Matt Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 A lot of journalists are digging and a lot of journalists are hitting a brick wall. Do you know if the reports of him considering legal action are true? And if so surely the truth with come out in time, even if it is a 'private' hearing I would expect the truth to be leaked.
escos Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 No one is saying that the owners are saints, nobody is saying that Pearson is the worst person on earth. We all know what Pearson is like, how many people he's fell out with. We know how the owners have stood by him when they've had ample opportunity to sack in the last year, they've backed him with money during this transfer window. But apparently our owners, who have never knowingly done this club or it's fans a bad turn, are involved in an evil plot to sack a totally innocent man for reasons that nobody has ever stated. It's laughable. The most sensible post I've read in ages.
UpTheLeagueFox Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 There are some (a small but vocal minority I grant you) who think the League One title, two play offs, a Championship title and Premier League survival was all down to luck and in no way down to Pearson whatsoever. Bless 'em.
ScouseFox Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 lmao at this thread about of best manager in time getting sacked for no reason having 69 pages and preki having over 80 about nothing. great man.
filbertway Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 Pearson is still "very angry" about his dismissal, I'm led to believe. Nice fanning of the flames there haha.
The Doctor Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 No one is saying that the owners are saints, nobody is saying that Pearson is the worst person on earth. Certainly seems that the likes of Frank are saying that actually. But apparently our owners, who have never knowingly done this club or it's fans a bad turn, are involved in an evil plot to sack a totally innocent man for reasons that nobody has ever stated. It's laughable. No-one has argued that, what they've argued is the board might have put their own interests ahead of those of the fans and of the club, and given we've just chucked off our best manager in 15 years without any sort of explanation, you have to admit they might have a point.
Webbo Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 Certainly seems that the likes of Frank are saying that actually. No-one has argued that, what they've argued is the board might have put their own interests ahead of those of the fans and of the club, and given we've just chucked off our best manager in 15 years without any sort of explanation, you have to admit they might have a point. In what way is sacking a successful manager in their best interests?
EnderbyFox Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 Spanking United 5-3, drawing from 2-0 down away at Liverpool, pulling off one of the greatest escapes in Premier League history with one of the best CM's of the last 10 years in the side. Shit season imo
The Doctor Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 In what way is sacking a successful manager in their best interests? The negative media attention then reflecting on their business... Pearson isn't a media/commercial friendly manager.
Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 Would you have taken 14th at the start of the season? Don't be daft. We didn't make Champions League so the season was an utter disaster.
Matt Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 I think it's quite possible that they think the negative media attention we got from the nothing incidents involving Pearson this season, may have adverse affects on the King Power brand. And they may also have been silly enough to think they could attract someone like Klopp or Hiddink. This is how I see it. Damage towards King Power - The brand. I'm thankful for what they've done, the money they've pumped in but they have to realised with any sponsorship and exposure (Which ultimately is what its about) there is a risk to such brand. Now LCFC and King Power are to seperate ententies, what is best for LCFC might not be what is best for King Power, but it seems they've gone with what is best for King Power. At the end of the day it's their train set, but this decision may have spelt serious consequences for LCFC, may i'm being melodramatic but it all remains to be seen, in a few months time we will see where we are and we can comment whether it is/was a bad or not so bad decision.
Webbo Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 I think it's quite possible that they think the negative media attention we got from the nothing incidents involving Pearson this season, may have adverse affects on the King Power brand. And they may also have been silly enough to think they could attract someone like Klopp or Hiddink. So why didn't they sack at the time of those incidents (and I don't think anybody on here thought the incident in Thailand was nothing at the time)? Why did they give him money to buy players this window? If they were planning on getting Hiddink or Klopp why didn't they sound them out first before they sacked Pearson? Or are successful billionaires too stupid to think of that? The negative media attention then reflecting on their business... Pearson isn't a media/commercial friendly manager. He's never been media friendly, why have they waited until now?
sulfoxide Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 So why didn't they sack at the time of those incidents (and I don't think anybody on here thought the incident in Thailand was nothing at the time)? Why did they give him money to buy players this window? If they were planning on getting Hiddink or Klopp why didn't they sound them out first before they sacked Pearson? Or are successful billionaires too stupid to think of that? One of the more sensible posts. I was at the point where I never wanted to hear the word football again. Yes they turned it round but for too long nativity ruled ok
Vlad the Fox Posted 12 July 2015 Posted 12 July 2015 The one thing the run at the end did was give us a fantastic spell of football which really allowed us to get our teeth into the season and premier league. Had we just picked those wins up dotted through a generally long mediocre run we would have had none of the excitement but the same end result.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.