filbertfoxy00 Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 They love to self publicise don't they? They should not be allowed to use the name of our club for a sport that has zero to do with football and it certainly shouldn't be featured on the official football club website! They might own the club in name but Leicester City, as with all other football clubs, belongs to the supporters.
Rincewind Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Well they are allowed to use the name King Power and the team represents Leicester and one of the logos for Leicester is a fox so all together it is King Power Leicester Foxes. Maybe not Leicester but we could claim that. Should be in General sport under polo then anyone interested can keep up to date. I never even knew there was a King Power team. Hope they dont use the King Power for matches or training. They'll be enough shit on the pitch during the season.
KFS Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Owners actions are getting a bit more suspect to me. Walking a pic of the King of Thailand around the pitch at the end of the season and now this- not to mention all the shit that's happened this a Summer. This is a football club, not a political or branding device.
GloverFox Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 ... of course it's a 'Brand' opportunity and of course it's a little 'self-indulgent' ... but really; it's fantastic that we have have a glitzy and quite frankly upper-class distinction about our associations these days! A world class brand in King Power, promoting a 'successful' English Premier League football club and spreading the image across influential and affluent groups is a sound business approach ... and whilst 'our' beloved club is prospering from the attentions then I for one am massively happy with the whole thing and it's appearance in the forum is great; otherwise, I for one would mostly likely have missed the 'good news' story! Good on the owners ... more of the same please, onwards and upwards!
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Ffs. what's the problem with having a polo team with that name? Jeez! Some people.
Webbo Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Who gives a flying ****!! Nobody really. It's just an excuse to abuse the owners. If Pearson hadn't have been sacked everyone would be saying how great the owners are.
FireFox Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Nobody really. It's just an excuse to abuse the owners. If Pearson hadn't have been sacked everyone would be saying how great the owners are.Exactly. Look back in the General Football and Sports section and nobody is complaining when they won the Queen's Cup.
KFS Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Nobody really. It's just an excuse to abuse the owners. If Pearson hadn't have been sacked everyone would be saying how great the owners are. To be fair, this is a pretty fair assessment.
Matt Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Nobody really. It's just an excuse to abuse the owners. If Pearson hadn't have been sacked everyone would be saying how great the owners are. Well it just shows how they've damaged the relationship with the fans doesn't it and the importance of hitting the ground running when the season starts, if we don't it'll be toxic and then they'll be some 'abuse' i'm sure. If we do, it'll go a long way to restoring the relationship, but won't completely fix it.
Webbo Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Well it just shows how they've damaged the relationship with the some fans doesn't it and the importance of hitting the ground running when the season starts, if we don't it'll be toxic and then they'll be some 'abuse' i'm sure. If we do, it'll go a long way to restoring the relationship, but won't completely fix it. I have the same feels towards the owners as I did before.
Matt Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 I have the same feels towards the owners as I did before. Good for you. I think it's fair to say my comments apply to a majority of fans judging by posts on here.
Webbo Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Good for you. I think it's fair to say my comments apply to a majority of fans judging by posts on here. The majority that can be bothered to post maybe.
inckley fox Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 The majority that can be bothered to post maybe. You've clearly been very selective in terms of what you've read then. A bit like that post of mine you read about how the owners had accumulated their wealth in a very different political climate to ours, which you reduced to 'the king of Thailand's to blame for sacking Pearson', about twenty times over. So you're either selective in terms of what you're able to understand, or selective in terms of what you choose to understand. Nobody really. It's just an excuse to abuse the owners. If Pearson hadn't have been sacked everyone would be saying how great the owners are. It makes me smile that you've explained pretty much anything anyone has said against the board in terms of it being 'an excuse' to abuse the owners, as if people hated them all along and finally they've got a reason to have a go at them. I'd like to think you were capable of understanding the fact that people's opinions have been changed by events and that, over the past few weeks, there have been some pretty big events to discuss. We were in the 3rd tier in 2008, we went up 31 overall league placings with Pearson, 20 of which were before this board turned up. Now maybe you see no reason why sacking that person would affect people's opinions of the owners - as you clearly state it hasn't affected yours - but for anybody whose opinion reacts to changes in circumstances, as opposed to simply remaining the same regardless of what happens, that's ever likely to have an impact. As for the polo tournament, the point remains that it has nothing to do with Leicester or football, which is presumably our main concern. They've made the association between their polo club and their football club, not me, and it's likely that they've done it because - as someone said in their defence - they want people to know that they run successful sports teams. But, as far as I can see, that leaves them rather open to people pointing out that success in a polo tournament has absolutely nothing to do with the effective running of a football club. It's a minor point, and of very little consequence in the greater scheme of things - not if they continue to enjoy success with Leicester City - but it's a still a valid one. And, like I said, they were the ones who chose to share this information on the football club's website. If they don't want people who follow the football team to pass comment on it then the trick would be not to make a song and dance about it on the football team's website. And naturally most people, whose opinions evolve according to the information they're presented with, will absorb this information and allow it to inform their opinions, one way or the other. Others clearly won't.
inckley fox Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Its clearly a ploy to promote their company. Exactly the same as owning our football club is. You'd have to be a bit naive to think otherwise. Of course, but we don't have to agree with it. And we don't have to think their company is wonderful either.
inckley fox Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 ... of course it's a 'Brand' opportunity and of course it's a little 'self-indulgent' ... but really; it's fantastic that we have have a glitzy and quite frankly upper-class distinction about our associations these days! A world class brand in King Power, promoting a 'successful' English Premier League football club and spreading the image across influential and affluent groups is a sound business approach ... and whilst 'our' beloved club is prospering from the attentions then I for one am massively happy with the whole thing and it's appearance in the forum is great; otherwise, I for one would mostly likely have missed the 'good news' story! Good on the owners ... more of the same please, onwards and upwards! You consider this 'good news' because you think it's wonderful to see our board hanging out in esteemed company, playing polo and spreading their 'world class brand... across influential and affluent groups'. I could start to explain why I find this sentiment so abhorrent, but have the feeling it would be lost on you. The one shred of sense in your post is about the club 'prospering' from the owners. If we prosper from the owners - and the recent criticisms of them are based on fears that we won't prosper from their latest interventions - then that's fantastic, with or without Pearson. But I doubt very much it will have anything to do with how many elite polo events they attend. And if they want the majority of people in Leicester to feel like they're sympathetically represented by these owners then it might not be a bad idea to spend less time gloating about this sort of thing. Especially on a club website where fans are presumably logging in to find out if we've managed to replace Cambiasso yet.
Webbo Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 You've clearly been very selective in terms of what you've read then. A bit like that post of mine you read about how the owners had accumulated their wealth in a very different political climate to ours, which you reduced to 'the king of Thailand's to blame for sacking Pearson', about twenty times over. So you're either selective in terms of what you're able to understand, or selective in terms of what you choose to understand. It makes me smile that you've explained pretty much anything anyone has said against the board in terms of it being 'an excuse' to abuse the owners, as if people hated them all along and finally they've got a reason to have a go at them. I'd like to think you were capable of understanding the fact that people's opinions have been changed by events and that, over the past few weeks, there have been some pretty big events to discuss. We were in the 3rd tier in 2008, we went up 31 overall league placings with Pearson, 20 of which were before this board turned up. Now maybe you see no reason why sacking that person would affect people's opinions of the owners - as you clearly state it hasn't affected yours - but for anybody whose opinion reacts to changes in circumstances, as opposed to simply remaining the same regardless of what happens, that's ever likely to have an impact. As for the polo tournament, the point remains that it has nothing to do with Leicester or football, which is presumably our main concern. They've made the association between their polo club and their football club, not me, and it's likely that they've done it because - as someone said in their defence - they want people to know that they run successful sports teams. But, as far as I can see, that leaves them rather open to people pointing out that success in a polo tournament has absolutely nothing to do with the effective running of a football club. It's a minor point, and of very little consequence in the greater scheme of things - not if they continue to enjoy success with Leicester City - but it's a still a valid one. And, like I said, they were the ones who chose to share this information on the football club's website. If they don't want people who follow the football team to pass comment on it then the trick would be not to make a song and dance about it on the football team's website. And naturally most people, whose opinions evolve according to the information they're presented with, will absorb this information and allow it to inform their opinions, one way or the other. Others clearly won't. Sacking a manager, fair enough everyone's got an opinion. This is a football forum, we're here to discuss things like this. The owners win a polo tournament, so what? They've not spent any of your money, they're not doing it on your time. They've announced it on the club's site, big deal, they own it. How has it adversely affected anyone? It's moaning for moaning's sake.
MPH Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 I think the reasons why they bought Leicester city are very well explained in this article... The top polo sporting event... Against international opposition drew a huge crowed of... 15,000. We've got more season ticket holders than that..
Webbo Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 I think the reasons why they bought Leicester city are very well explained in this article... The top polo sporting event... Against international opposition drew a huge crowed of... 15,000. We've got more season ticket holders than that.. The fact that Top plays for them suggests it's more of a hobby than a promotional project to me.
inckley fox Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Sacking a manager, fair enough everyone's got an opinion. This is a football forum, we're here to discuss things like this. The owners win a polo tournament, so what? They've not spent any of your money, they're not doing it on your time. They've announced it on the club's site, big deal, they own it. How has it adversely affected anyone? It's moaning for moaning's sake. Absolutely, but we're not here exclusively to discuss Pearson's sacking. If you think a polo team in Dubai with no affiliation to the city of Leicester is of specific interest to Leicester City Football Club, then that's up to you. I'm simply saying that I don't think it is, and if they think such a thing will persuade us that they're expert leaders of sports teams - as someone else (again, not me) suggested - then I fail to see the relation between the two. Again, it was their choice to share the news on a football club website. I didn't make that decision, I didn't start this thread on the football forum and I've simply responded to a couple of points people have made. Maybe it is moaning for moaning's sake, though I don't think I've got emotional about anything, or started throwing insults around, or taken some sort of stubborn, intransigent stance on the matter, I've just passed comment. Some people are really happy about this news - are they adulating for adulation's sake? If it's a waste of everyone's time then surely you and I can agree on that, and that - seeing as it's all totally irrelevant - a football webpage probably wasn't the place for a lengthy celebration of their polo success. Or do you want to have your pie and scoff it down too?!
Mark_w Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Nobody really. It's just an excuse to abuse the owners. If Pearson hadn't have been sacked everyone would be saying how great the owners are. Many were always skeptical. And surely the decision to sack a manager is significant enough that it can change peoples' opinions, it's fair for people to judge the owners on their actions and dismissing a manager is pretty noteworthy. So I think it's pretty understandable that shifting the direction the club was going in has changed peoples views of the owners, some positively, some negatively. What all that has to do with polo I have no idea.
Webbo Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Absolutely, but we're not here exclusively to discuss Pearson's sacking. If you think a polo team in Dubai with no affiliation to the city of Leicester is of specific interest to Leicester City Football Club, then that's up to you. I'm simply saying that I don't think it is, and if they think such a thing will persuade us that they're expert leaders of sports teams - as someone else (again, not me) suggested - then I fail to see the relation between the two. Again, it was their choice to share the news on a football club website. I didn't make that decision, I didn't start this thread on the football forum and I've simply responded to a couple of points people have made. Maybe it is moaning for moaning's sake, though I don't think I've got emotional about anything, or started throwing insults around, or taken some sort of stubborn, intransigent stance on the matter, I've just passed comment. Some people are really happy about this news - are they adulating for adulation's sake? If it's a waste of everyone's time then surely you and I can agree on that, and that - seeing as it's all totally irrelevant - a football webpage probably wasn't the place for a lengthy celebration of their polo success. Or do you want to have your pie and scoff it down too?! Why do you always assume I'm talking about you? My original post in this thread was a general comment on the level of needless complaining about nothing in it. I hadn't even noticed that you'd posted.
Kitchandro Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 I like Webbo but he's become very insufferable lately with his astonishing bias towards the owners as if they're doing us a favour. They'll get criticism just as any manager or player would if they did questionable things. The official site should be for news on football matters. Polo has nothing to do with it and it's not right this is being plugged on our website. End of story.
Kitchandro Posted 25 July 2015 Posted 25 July 2015 Many were always skeptical. And surely the decision to sack a manager is significant enough that it can change peoples' opinions, it's fair for people to judge the owners on their actions and dismissing a manager is pretty noteworthy. So I think it's pretty understandable that shifting the direction the club was going in has changed peoples views of the owners, some positively, some negatively. What all that has to do with polo I have no idea. The sensible ones were. They're not real football fans and they can't possibly understand real football fans. Why some people just assumed they were the perfect owners I have no idea. Naivety, I guess. This is one of 3 football clubs in the top division to oppose safe-standing. The other 2 were Liverpool and Everton. I've no idea why they've always been so popular, other than the fact they're rich. They care no more about the fans than Mandaric did, and there was always a percentage of fans who didn't like him.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.