The Owners

[midland_red]

I suspect that the owners - who deserve our undying respect and admiration - are themselves confused as to how it has all one so wrong

Like good businessmen, they delegate and it can be hard to come to terms with the fact that they have made a mistake. They have been commendably loyal to their appointees and agonised long and hard before removing both CR and NP. In the case of CR perilously long

They will certainly be bemused that winning the prem did not automatically make us a big club. They were prepared to invest (compare to Newcastle) yet we have bought badly and have expensive resources sitting on the bench. They might ask themselves how much money they really do need to spend to fulfil their ambitions and on a sleepless night wonder if it is beyond them.

Their own uncertainty might explain apparently confusing signals

- If true, voting for the top six to take a higher share of the TV pot

- investment in Belgium

yet

- If true, making the Silva deal dependent on selling Drinky

Football insiders may have read the signs better however. I have always believed that shakey wasn't the first choice, but other targets, despite promises on resources looked at the set up and said No. (Think – do I report to Rudkin? Will I have control over transfers?)

I'm sure that a run of poor performances will force them to remove shakey, but they may repeat the error (think allardyce) without a root and branch look at what has got wrong. For that they may need advice from a serious football professional.

PS – they may also be distracted by this court case in Thailand. This is a country where cases aren't decided on guilt or innocence, its about shifting balances of power and politics. That must take up a fair bit of management thought and time

Edited 1 October 2017 by midland_red

[Chrysalis]

it does kinda feel like they at least closing the purse strings.

 

The last minute decision to sell drinky, and the loan out of players like mendy (I assume to lower wage bill) suggests there is bigger budget concerns now.

 

Drinkwater especially smacks of someone making a rash decision based on ££.

[Stadt]

40 minutes ago, midland_red said:

I suspect that the owners - who deserve our undying respect and admiration - are themselves confused as to how it has all one so wrong

Like good businessmen, they delegate and it can be hard to come to terms with the fact that they have made a mistake. They have been commendably loyal to their appointees and agonised long and hard before removing both CR and NP. In the case of CR perilously long

They will certainly be bemused that winning the prem did not automatically make us a big club. They were prepared to invest (compare to Newcastle) yet we have bought badly and have expensive resources sitting on the bench. They might ask themselves how much money they really do need to spend to fulfil their ambitions and on a sleepless night wonder if it is beyond them.

Their own uncertainty might explain apparently confusing signals

- If true, voting for the top six to take a higher share of the TV pot

- investment in Belgium

yet

- If true, making the Silva deal dependent on selling Drinky

Football insiders may have read the signs better however. I have always believed that shakey wasn't the first choice, but other targets, despite promises on resources looked at the set up and said No. (Think – do I report to Rudkin? Will I have control over transfers?)

I'm sure that a run of poor performances will force them to remove shakey, but they may repeat the error (think allardyce) without a root and branch look at what has got wrong. For that they may need advice from a serious football professional.

PS – they may also be distracted by this court case in Thailand. This is a country where cases aren't decided on guilt or innocence, its about shifting balances of power and politics. That must take up a fair bit of management thought and time

⬜️ - I agree to accept the terms & conditions

[Dames]

2 hours ago, Leycestrian said:

Why are you having a go at Rudkin over the Silva affair ? I doubt that he has his hands on the purse strings. He is Director of Football, not Financial Director.

You may not rate Rudkin, but wasn't the Academy very successful when he was in charge ?

Because he's the director of football and he's in charge of all transfers? Ultimately the responsibility lies with him. It would have also been on his watch that stupid statement was released about Silva trying to get more money out of Chelsea.

 

Also how many of those players from that successful academy era are now playing at a top level?

 

He's not very good at his job but he's very good at keeping it. 

[Stan]

3 hours ago, sphericalfox said:

Like apostrophe's? 

No, like apostrophes 

[sphericalfox]

31 minutes ago, Stan said:

No, like apostrophes 

Sigh...

 

[AjcW]

3 hours ago, Parafox said:

I'm not being disrespectful towards our owners in the thread title. It was late and I was trying to be succinct. Sorry if I caused any unintended offence.

Meh it’s fine, I asked for the same with the Demarai Gray “attitude” thread. I know no offence was intended ?

Edited 1 October 2017 by AjcW

[CyprusFox]

1 hour ago, Dames said:

Because he's the director of football and he's in charge of all transfers? Ultimately the responsibility lies with him. It would have also been on his watch that stupid statement was released about Silva trying to get more money out of Chelsea.

 

Also how many of those players from that successful academy era are now playing at a top level?

 

He's not very good at his job but he's very good at keeping it. 

Couldn't have put it better myself. He is the "DIRECTOR OF FOOTBALL". Consequently, all of these football related fcuk ups are ultimately his responsibility, but the guy's invisible. Owns up to fcuk all and says fcuk all. The changes at our club need to start with this tw*t before we're completely bolloxed.

[FoxyPalace.com]

6 hours ago, bigboy said:

In the sports bar in London last night, some of the talk by some well known pundits was the Thais are looking for a buyer.

Lets hope Bill Gates is in for us then.

[weller54]

4 minutes ago, FoxyPalace.com said:

Lets hope Bill Gates is in for us then.

Don't think even GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGarth Gates would be interested in us right now!! 

[davieG]

40 minutes ago, CyprusFox said:

Couldn't have put it better myself. He is the "DIRECTOR OF FOOTBALL". Consequently, all of these football related fcuk ups are ultimately his responsibility, but the guy's invisible. Owns up to fcuk all and says fcuk all. The changes at our club need to start with this tw*t before we're completely bolloxed.

Him or Andrew Neville
Football Operations Director

[Micky]

I suspect the owners are not panicking yet. These guys deal with tricky situations on a daily basis. They will be disappointed with our start but they will be a long way from making a change.

[st albans fox]

7 hours ago, bigboy said:

In the sports bar in London last night, some of the talk by some well known pundits was the Thais are looking for a buyer.

Unless you are selling to a national wealth fund, there are very few individuals out there who have the dough to spend several hundreds of millions on a club and then finance expansion of both the infrastructure and playing squad. 

 

Any sale of our club  would likely be followed by a continued slow downward spiral of performance as the profits are drained to cover the investment. we could get lucky I suppose - there aren't many prem clubs with our recent history for sale (not that there is any evidence that we are)

[mozartfox]

4 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

it does kinda feel like they at least closing the purse strings.

 

The last minute decision to sell drinky, and the loan out of players like mendy (I assume to lower wage bill) suggests there is bigger budget concerns now.

 

Drinkwater especially smacks of someone making a rash decision based on ££.

Then why wasn't Mahrez off loaded to Roma?  Even at their price it represented a massive profit. 

[CyprusFox]

1 hour ago, davieG said:

Him or Andrew Neville
Football Operations Director

FFS, how many football directors have we got? Never heard of this guy!

[davieG]

Just now, CyprusFox said:

FFS, how many football directors have we got? Never heard of this guy!

He was here in the MON days if I remember correctly, used to deal with all the transfer negotiating. Obviously didn't have the final say back then and may not now.

[KingsX]

1 hour ago, Micky said:

I suspect the owners are not panicking yet. These guys deal with tricky situations on a daily basis. They will be disappointed with our start but they will be a long way from making a change.

I doubt the owners would ever panic over the club, given their successful navigation of Thai politics, where wrong steps can mean stripping of assets or even imprisonment.

 

I would guess they are considering alternatives.  Perhaps including the levels above CS -- they cannot be happy about spending 100M on unused players, nor the prospect of paying a second manager to go away in less than a year.

[Izzy]

3 hours ago, davieG said:

Him or Andrew Neville
Football Operations Director

 

1 hour ago, CyprusFox said:

FFS, how many football directors have we got? Never heard of this guy!

 

1 hour ago, davieG said:

He was here in the MON days if I remember correctly, used to deal with all the transfer negotiating. Obviously didn't have the final say back then and may not now.

He used to be the Football Operations Assistant Director I think.

 

But the abbreviation offended some people 

[davieG]

Just now, Izzy Muzzett said:

 

 

He used to be the Football Operations Assistant Director I think.

 

But the abbreviation offended some people 

You're funny you should try posting some jokes in the Joke thread, oh wait.......

 

[Wymsey]

1 hour ago, davieG said:

He was here in the MON days if I remember correctly, used to deal with all the transfer negotiating. Obviously didn't have the final say back then and may not now.

He actually does offer advice on this front, but only via an unofficial capacity.

He's regarded as respected at the club, and the same for Greg Clarke (FA chairman, who aided the club during the club's administration crisis period).

 

Edited 1 October 2017 by Wymeswold fox

[suffolk fox]

9 hours ago, Ian Nacho said:

We can’t blame the owners for a sh*te performance against Bournemouth   

we can they appointed Shakespeare

[Parafox]

@grebfromgrebland/

Ok so you laugh at my point, lets hear what you have to say. It's easy to mock from a keyboard mate, but that's not a constructive argument.

[Chrysalis]

2 hours ago, mozartfox said:

Then why wasn't Mahrez off loaded to Roma?  Even at their price it represented a massive profit. 

I assume they felt he was worth more than drinkwater, and maybe they rate mahrez contribution to the team higher than drinkwater.

 

Also we dont know how the roma deal was structured vs the chelsea deal.

 

When converted to GBP I think roma's highest offer was less than drinkwater went for.

 

Its also possible they budgeted for the sale of mahrez, it didnt happen, we had that hole, and the late chelsea bid made an easy way to fill it, which would fit what I said, someone seen the ££ and acted too quickly without realising what they doing.

Edited 1 October 2017 by Chrysalis

[C-man]

Think it's harsh to argue they are closing the purse strings - we had a pretty big net spend in the summer (assuming Silva deal will still go through) and our wage bill is through the roof in comparison to 2-3 years ago.

 

That said, I think they have made mistakes - the biggest of which is to surround themselves with staff who continue to look fairly incompetent at this level. Rudkin's deficiencies are clear but I don't see what Andrew Neville brings to the Club either. 

 

If we're honest and judging on the rest of their appointments, they got desperate when re-appointing NP, fluked the appointment of Ranieri, and now seemingly have no idea how we can progress with the most expensively assembled squad in our history. 

 

I admire their loyalty and willingness to persist with the idea that consistency and continuity within a club's management is important to long-term success, but I think we're at a crossroads and they will need to make some tough decisions very soon if they want us to take advantage of being recent Champions.

[mozartfox]

12 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

I assume they felt he was worth more than drinkwater, and maybe they rate mahrez contribution to the team higher than drinkwater.

 

Also we dont know how the roma deal was structured vs the chelsea deal.

 

When converted to GBP I think roma's highest offer was less than drinkwater went for.

 

Its also possible they budgeted for the sale of mahrez, it didnt happen, we had that hole, and the late chelsea bid made an easy way to fill it, which would fit what I said, someone seen the ££ and acted too quickly without realising what they doing.

Who knows.  But I do not accept the Owners are not committed to LCFC.