Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
CosbehFox

The "do they mean us?" thread pt 2

By CosbehFox, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

dayday

dayday

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

whats the gist of it?

Basically looking at how well run we are, and how they wish they had the same type of owners that have the clubs interests at heart, there a few negative posts, but overall quite complimentary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
peach0000

peach0000

Posted
Posted

It's a good read. There does seem to be a misconception on there that our owners came in to a club debt free and with a free stadium. That isn't true is it? I seem to remember them buying the stadium off some teachers union or something and writing off 100million odd in debt. Correct me if I'm wrong it seems a while ago now!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The_77

The_77

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Raw Dykes said:

I haven't started reading it yet, so I'm trusting you it's worth it, but here's the link...

https://www.kumb.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=179695&sid=d05c91b975d77a138faea66928711fc6

Read a couple of pages-- I'm not going to sit and read the whole thing but it's fairly respectful and balanced. Most of the chat contrasts the priorities and qualities of our respective clubs's owners. One of the other common refrains is that Jamie Vardy is a major reason for our success: West Ham would have had their share of achievements behind a 20-goal-per-season striker, and that nobody could have seen Mr. Vardy becoming the world-class striker he is today.

 

I'd counter that by saying that Leicester City Football Club knew he had loads of talent and potential and that his transfer fee was a very calculated risk. The club made a thoughtful financial and human investment in him that paid off for everyone (and we're all very grateful for it!).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TJB-fox

TJB-fox

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Manini said:

There’s the Scottish accent and there’s them fellers. **** me I had to slow that reyt down to make head nor tail of that in places lol 

Yep agreed. Really struggle with their podcasts with Andy Halliday in, accent wise. Especially when he’s using nicknames or abbreviations for people/things I’m not familiar with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Raw Dykes

Raw Dykes

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

A West Ham fan:

 

"We have better players than Leicester overall. They have a few that would get in our 18 or XI, but not many. It'll be even less once Moyes has finished building his squad.

The major difference is that they are small enough to be comfortable cheating to narrow the gap. Horrible, scummy club. Decent owners though. :thup: There's elements of their club that we can look upon with envy, but nothing of significance. I'm happier with our lot, I've got to say. There's no way they'll sustain it. They're basically the new Southampton. They'll be gone in a few years."

  • Haha 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites
murphy

murphy

Posted
Posted (edited)

Overall it seems that they acknowledge that we are better run than they are, but a few inaccuracies:

 

1).  We built on the title and the extra money that bought in.  The reality is that we blew it with calamitous signings such as Slimani and Musa and then Nacho and Silva (sorry Ian).

 

2).  Some bitterness over the administration saga which predated our revival by about seven years.  They seem to think that we got our stadium for free when I thought that the Vichai bought it when he took over?  A bit of a cheek for West Ham of all clubs to bring that up when they were basically gifted a brand new stadium on the back of The Olympics.

 

3). "They've outspent us massively..."   I would be very surprised if that were true.  West Ham have become a byword for expensive transfer failures.  The difference is that we have generated our cash by selling players - Kante, Mahrez, Drinkwater, Maguire and Chilwell = £270m.  It's net spend that counts.

 

4). Our luck will run out when Vardy calls it a day.  There might be some truth in that.  :(

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by murphy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
peach0000

peach0000

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Raw Dykes said:

A West Ham fan:

 

"We have better players than Leicester overall. They have a few that would get in our 18 or XI, but not many. It'll be even less once Moyes has finished building his squad.

To be fair even their own fans weren't having that comment lol They was put in their place by fellow West Ham supporters! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
davieG

davieG

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, gerrytaggart said:

Haven't Spurs just announced a £1.1B debt?    Surely their status as rich has got to be in question! 

Yes but they're included in that group because they've benefited from being in the CL as have Arsenal. That's what has enabled them both to build their stadiums and up until recently maintain their presence in the CL. Of course their inclusion in that is at risk but as it stands with respect to the Media they are still part of it. They're certainly not there from winning Trophies in the modern era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raw Dykes

Raw Dykes

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, peach0000 said:

To be fair even their own fans weren't having that comment lol They was put in their place by fellow West Ham supporters! 

You're right. Here's one reply:

 

"You can't be serious?

Schmeichel, Pereira, Castagne, Fofana, Justin, Tielemans, Maddison, Barnes, Vardy would all walk into our team. And the only reason Ndidi doesn't get in is we've got one of the only players that matches him in that role in Rice."

Edited by Raw Dykes
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
majaco

majaco

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Raw Dykes said:

A West Ham fan:

 

"We have better players than Leicester overall. They have a few that would get in our 18 or XI, but not many. It'll be even less once Moyes has finished building his squad.

The major difference is that they are small enough to be comfortable cheating to narrow the gap. Horrible, scummy club. Decent owners though. :thup: There's elements of their club that we can look upon with envy, but nothing of significance. I'm happier with our lot, I've got to say. There's no way they'll sustain it. They're basically the new Southampton. They'll be gone in a few years."

Interesting.  Delusional.  Perhaps I am delusional about Leicester.

 

In my opinion, we have 12 players who could slot into any PL team.  That is not to say, they are all better than anyone else.  for instance, Barnes could slot into the Liverpool team; it dies not mean he is better than Mane.  Manc have at least thirteen who could slot into any team, Liverpool at least a dozen.  

 

Currently, I don't think any other team has 10.  West Ham , off the top of my head, have about 4: Soucek, Antonio, Rice and..  I've forgotten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raw Dykes

Raw Dykes

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, majaco said:

Interesting.  Delusional.  Perhaps I am delusional about Leicester.

 

In my opinion, we have 12 players who could slot into any PL team.  That is not to say, they are all better than anyone else.  for instance, Barnes could slot into the Liverpool team; it dies not mean he is better than Mane.  Manc have at least thirteen who could slot into any team, Liverpool at least a dozen.  

 

Currently, I don't think any other team has 10.  West Ham , off the top of my head, have about 4: Soucek, Antonio, Rice and..  I've forgotten.

I'm not sure, but I think you may be in the minority in that way of looking at it.

 

I always thought it meant that a player is better than what that other team already has. Maybe I'm wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Golden Fox

Golden Fox

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, dayday said:

A decent thread on KUMB( West Ham forum)

 

The difference between West Ham and Leicester.

I gave up when I got to the comment that they "have many more supporters and a much more loyal support". 

 

Having lived in East London and having a brother-in-law season ticket holder, I don't disagree they have a massive support base that covers much of Essex.

 

But it is the arrogance of bigger clubs that their fans are in someway more loyal is what gets me. Let alone "much more" loyal. In my experience, football fans tend to be football fans and there is a natural range in how far they go to support their club, but to claim your clubs fans are more loyal is just arrogant and typical of West Ham. 

 

(I didn't even need to bring up "The West Ham way" of playing football and the fact they won the World Cup for us as I didn't want to overplay the arrogance card...) 

Edited by Golden Fox
Typo
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fox in the North

Fox in the North

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Always amazing how (in the West Ham thread) they can recall our admin period without mentioning the root cause (a squinty eyed toe rag and monster agent). 

Or the fact (apart from one) we meandered in the championship and then sank to our lowest ever ebb in league one. Yep, we really took advantage of administration at the time!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...