At Leicester City, a Revival Fueled by Sense, Not Sentiment - New York Times

[urban.spaceman]

At Leicester City, a Revival Fueled by Sense, Not Sentiment

By Rory Smith

Oct. 18, 2019

The tears, for Danny Simpson, started to flow in the changing room, as he said goodbye to the club he had called home for five years, the club he had helped make improbable history. In a way — the nicest possible way — that is just how Leicester City had wanted it.

Leicester’s executives had known, for some time, that Simpson would leave the club when his contract expired in May 2019, and they had known that they wanted to give him and his teammate Shinji Okazaki, whose contract was also expiring, the right sort of goodbye, one last act of gratitude for all they had done.

Despite neither being a regular for much of the 2018-19 campaign, both were brought on as substitutes for the season’s final game against Chelsea. Both were given chance to take the applause of the crowd one last time. Both were afforded lavish tributes once they left the field. Both were moved by the affection that lingered.

Leicester has done the same with almost every player who was part of the most famous team in the club’s history, the team that emerged from nowhere to claim the Premier League title in 2016. It is a subject Leicester’s power brokers have discussed at length over the last couple of years: how to pay tribute to the past while ensuring the club does not become ensnared by it.

In each case, Leicester has taken great care with its farewell. It has not tried to smuggle players out of the club, brooding over their treatment. The club’s owners — first Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha, the Thai benefactor who was killed in a helicopter crash at the club’s stadium a year ago, and then his son, Aiyawatt — have thanked each player personally for his contributions.

Many, like Simpson, have been given one final game at Leicester’s King Power Stadium. More still have been offered a trinket of the club’s affection: several have received a statuette of a fox, the club’s emblem, cast in silver.

Those who left when the club might have preferred that they stayed — Ngolo Kanté, Riyad Mahrez — have not done so with any bad blood. Leicester’s communications strategy, in those cases, centered on affection, and thanks.

But that treatment has not been limited to those players who were central to Leicester’s miracle; the club has been conscious of the need to honor even those who were in the supporting cast. Leonardo Ulloa was a substitute, more often than not. Marcin Wasilewski was barely even that. They were both given the fondest of farewells, too.

 

Leicester City

 

✔@LCFC

 

 

We bid farewell to an outstanding Club servant tomorrow, as Marcin Wasilewski calls time on his spell with #lcfc: http://leic.it/2r3jNEK 

 

1,600

4:31 PM - May 20, 2017

Twitter Ads info and privacy

 

551 people are talking about this

 

 

 

 

None of this, though, should be mistaken for sentimentality. Three years since the proudest moment in the club’s history, and only two after its maiden appearance in the Champions League quarterfinals, Leicester City is almost unrecognizable.

It has wheeled through three managers since the departure of the man who delivered the title, Claudio Ranieri, and is on its third head of player recruitment in three years. It has sold not only the likes of Kanté and Mahrez, but also Harry Maguire, brought in a year after the title was won, and now the most expensive defender in history. It has lost scouts and analysts to its rivals, all of them keen not only to strengthen themselves but to weaken an insurgent. Most tragically, of course, it lost the man everyone connected to Leicester calls Khun Vichai, the owner whose clear vision and deep pockets helped it sweep through the leagues, right to the summit.

Though a handful of members from the title-winning squad remain, only two, the goalkeeper Kasper Schmeichel and the striker Jamie Vardy, are core components of Brendan Rodgers’s current team. Surrounding them now are a clutch of bright young things. Some of them, like Ben Chilwell and Hamza Choudhury, were drawn from Leicester’s own youth system. Others, like James Maddison, were recruited from lower down England’s league pyramid. More still, like Wilfred Ndidi and Youri Tielemans, arrived from abroad.

This has been Leicester’s velvet revolution: quiet and respectful, but ruthless, too. There was a time when it seemed Leicester might be weighed down by the memory of 2016, when loyalty to the players who had done the impossible appeared likely to hamstring the club.

The squad’s power was widely believed to have been a defining factor in Ranieri’s demise, and in the appointment of Craig Shakespeare, Ranieri’s assistant, as his successor. The failure of Claude Puel, who came next, to win over those players ultimately cost him his job, too, despite the reservations of ownership about the optics of another managerial change. Leicester, at times, seemed to be struggling to overcome its own success.

Now, though, the club is in the rudest of health, with an ambitious, promising squad; a charismatic manager in Rodgers; and, in Vardy and Schmeichel, two unifying, experienced figures in the changing room, embodiments of the spirit of 2016. And crucially, all of it is coming together at a time when so many members of England’s traditional Big Six are in a moment of uncertainty, trapped between generations.

With Leicester third in the table ahead of Sunday’s trip to Crystal Palace, a return to the Champions League seems feasible. Another title may be a step too far, but Leicester is dreaming, once again. It is building a new training facility, now that it has outgrown its current home, and the way Susan Wheeler, its chief executive, handled the sale of Maguire to Manchester United last summer made it clear it no longer believes it needs to be pushed around by its supposed betters.

What is harder to discern is how much of this has happened as part of some grand design, and how much is — if not exactly an accident — simply an ability to roll with the punches, to have enough institutional expertise to ride out the sort of seismic changes that Leicester has seen in the last three years.

Perhaps, in a sense, it is both. That Leicester recruits well is not in question; the braintrust that surrounds Jon Rudkin, the director of football, has developed a reputation not only for thoroughness, but for decisiveness, too, particularly when it comes to young players.

 

Brendan Rodgers with James Maddison, one of the young players in Leicester’s remade squad.Craig Brough/Action Images, via Reuters

Maddison, now something of a cause célèbre whenever the England national team squad is announced, is a case in point: Leicester scouted him for several months, as all teams would, but was then willing to take the plunge, and declare its interest, as others prevaricated.

Maddison’s final choice was Leicester or Southampton, for some time considered the gold standard for youth development. Both were prepared to offer him the playing time he craved. But he knew Chilwell and Chaudhury from England’s youth system, and that was enough to swing it for him.

What he did not know is that he would be joining a club where the owners believe not only in giving youth an opportunity to shine, but are convinced that happy players are better players; a club where the mood in the changing room is still set by the veterans of 2016; a team where many members of the support staff have been in place for years, if not decades, and where, eventually, a manager with the self-confidence to empower his staff would arrive.

To an extent, too, how Leicester got here is not as compelling a question as what happens now. What Leicester had in 2016 was a breathtaking, wondrous one-off achievement. Few, even inside the club, thought the miracle could be repeated. That team went straight to a destination; this latest incarnation is in the middle of a journey.

For those outside the established financial elite of the Premier League, that is a fragile thing. Boasting a collection of promising young players is a pleasure, but it is also a threat. Eagle eyes will be watching. How Leicester responds to that — whether it holds firm, persuading its players that there is no need to say goodbye, to be handed that silver fox just yet, or whether it cannot resist the pressure — will determine, however the club got here, precisely how long it will stay.

[Tuna]

Susan Wheeler 

[Bayfox]

16 minutes ago, Tuna said:

Susan Wheeler 

Hamza who?

[LC/FC]

Yeah, this messy text is kinda what I imagined when I chose not to copy and paste the whole thing. 

[foxile5]

Refers to City as 'it' rather than 'they'. Crass Americanism that really picks at the heart of the club.

 

In an article about the warmth of the club the writer has managed to strip any community identity from City. 

 

 

[irishfoxkev]

4 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

Refers to City as 'it' rather than 'they'. Crass Americanism that really picks at the heart of the club.

 

In an article about the warmth of the club the writer has managed to strip any community identity from City. 

 

 

Maybe a bit of Crass Americanism and couple of bad spelling of names but overall I thought it was a good read and very positive about our club.....certainly a lot better than some of the junk spouted by a lot of the so called experts and journalists mainly based in London 

[CosbehFox]

It’s written by an English journalist. His Dad is from Leicester, he was brought up in Leeds and now lives in Manchester.

 

says a lot that he feels we are a story worth writing about to Americans 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

Refers to City as 'it' rather than 'they'. Crass Americanism that really picks at the heart of the club.

 

In an article about the warmth of the club the writer has managed to strip any community identity from City. 

 

 

Bit of an overreaction. He's writing in an American paper for an American audience, and presumably following the paper's style guide. If he kept going on about what an awesome soccer franchise we are then maybe you'd have a point. I don't see how he's stripping away the club's identity because he writes "Leicester City has" rather than "Leicester City have"

[vanity]

1 hour ago, Guest said:

Bit of an overreaction. He's writing in an American paper for an American audience, and presumably following the paper's style guide. If he kept going on about what an awesome soccer franchise we are then maybe you'd have a point. I don't see how he's stripping away the club's identity because he writes "Leicester City has" rather than "Leicester City have"

Seriously, jesus, get a grip.

[WigstonWanderer]

There’s some right Prima Donnas in here. 

[urban.spaceman]

2 hours ago, foxile5 said:

Refers to City as 'it' rather than 'they'. Crass Americanism that really picks at the heart of the club.

 

In an article about the warmth of the club the writer has managed to strip any community identity from City. 

Our pronouns should be they/their 🏳️‍🌈

[Free Falling Foxes]

It was a small piece on the inside pages. There was a massive article on their back page about Celtic reserves.

[Charl91]

I get really worried about all the articles saying how well we're doing. 

 

Tempting fate!

[foxile5]

8 hours ago, Guest said:

Bit of an overreaction. He's writing in an American paper for an American audience, and presumably following the paper's style guide. If he kept going on about what an awesome soccer franchise we are then maybe you'd have a point. I don't see how he's stripping away the club's identity because he writes "Leicester City has" rather than "Leicester City have"

Not an overreaction. I mentioned that these little Americanisations would creep in this season, owing to this shift to American based journalism, and that it would change our sport for the 

Worst. 

 

These are the first steps on the road to franchise creation. I love my team. Its an us not an it. That's an important distinction to make. 

[foxile5]

7 hours ago, vanity said:

Seriously, jesus, get a grip.

I'm not Jesus. How about you either block me or keep your pointless commentary to yourself. 

[foxile5]

8 hours ago, Guest said:

Bit of an overreaction. He's writing in an American paper for an American audience, and presumably following the paper's style guide. If he kept going on about what an awesome soccer franchise we are then maybe you'd have a point. I don't see how he's stripping away the club's identity because he writes "Leicester City has" rather than "Leicester City have"

It is the first steps towards 'soccer franchise'. 

 

In England teams are a joint. Its the sum of the parts rather than a single entity. 'they' and 'we' fit much better. 

 

These are important distinctions to observe. 

[CosbehFox]

48 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

Not an overreaction. I mentioned that these little Americanisations would creep in this season, owing to this shift to American based journalism, and that it would change our sport for the 

Worst. 

 

These are the first steps on the road to franchise creation. I love my team. Its an us not an it. That's an important distinction to make. 

It’s for an American audience. English journalist writes it and the editor would alter it to suit its audience. 

 

You are literally reading far too much into it 

[foxile5]

3 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

It’s for an American audience. English journalist writes it and the editor would alter it to suit its audience. 

 

You are literally reading far too much into it 

The American audience is far, far greater

Once that becomes the established and dominant interest, and of course financial contributor, then what do you think will happen? That's what is slowly happening. 

 

That's the line people are taking - Americanisation of football - and there's huge indicators of it slowly happening. It doesn't mean it should be slowly swallowed without resistance. 

[Tanya]

His editor would have changed his copy to adhere to the publication's style guide. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

I really like Rory Smith. I though that was a lovely, warm article and I especially liked the anecdote about the silver fox 

[foxile5]

2 minutes ago, Tanya said:

His editor would have changed his copy to adhere to the publication's style guide. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

I really like Rory Smith. I though that was a lovely, warm article and I especially liked the anecdote about the silver fox 

I doubt very much a style guide would concern itself with the use of pronouns. At best there will be recommendations for language use, but certainly it wouldn't be as specific as 'use only these pronouns when referencing a football team'. 

 

Also, I highly doubt the editor of a gigantic paper is passing that close a rule over the 'soccer' pages. You're just explaining it away. 

 

Regardless, it doesn't mean that we shouldn't object to the Americanisation of Football. Surely you're not blind to the fact that there has Benn a gigantic shift in sports journalism in the very recent past. 

 

Language is central to our perception of the physical world and its important to mark these things. I don't want Leicester to become an 'it'. That flies directly on the ethos WE have been building. 

[MarriedaLeicesterGirl]

I edit for a U.S  publication. We use American usage, and follow the AP style guide. Occasionally, I even have to write articles, since we don't have a UK correspondent. I use "soccer", singular verbs, and other Americanisms. Although I would like to think I was part of a powerful cabal to change the face of British football (the very few times I write about sports it is almost always about Celtic or Rangers), it's really so my U.S. readership doesn't think I am having a stroke.

[foxile5]

Just now, MarriedaLeicesterGirl said:

I edit for a U.S  publication. We use American usage, and follow the AP style guide. Occasionally, I even have to write articles, since we don't have a UK correspondent. I use "soccer", singular verbs, and other Americanisms. Although I would like to think I was part of a powerful cabal to change the face of British football (the very few times I write about sports it is almost always about Celtic or Rangers), it's really so my U.S. readership doesn't think I am having a stroke.

It's not about nefarious intentions. It's about the fact that this will change over time and I wholly disagree with it. So I like to point out our now and again. 

 

I wish there were a cabal. 

[MarriedaLeicesterGirl]

3 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

I doubt very much a style guide would concern itself with the use of pronouns. At best there will be recommendations for language use, but certainly it wouldn't be as specific as 'use only these pronouns when referencing a football team'. 

 

Also, I highly doubt the editor of a gigantic paper is passing that close a rule over the 'soccer' pages. You're just explaining it away. 

 

Regardless, it doesn't mean that we shouldn't object to the Americanisation of Football. Surely you're not blind to the fact that there has Benn a gigantic shift in sports journalism in the very recent past. 

 

Language is central to our perception of the physical world and its important to mark these things. I don't want Leicester to become an 'it'. That flies directly on the ethos WE have been building. 

Yes, style guides do include such things. Seriously, editors at US publications have to de-British copy from the UK, and vice versa.

 

I read about "hat tricks" in NFL games in UK papers all the time. I don't clutch my pearls when it happens.

[foxile5]

1 minute ago, MarriedaLeicesterGirl said:

Yes, style guides do include such things. Seriously, editors at US publications have to de-British copy from the UK, and vice versa.

 

I read about "hat tricks" in NFL games in UK papers all the time. I don't clutch my pearls when it happens.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ap+style+guide+pdf&oq=ap+style+guide&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l3.3407j0j4&client=ms-android-sonymobile&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

 

Here's the AP style guide, as mentioned above, have at it. I can't see anything about referring to collective in singular. 

 

Again. It is worth objecting to. 

[MarriedaLeicesterGirl]

Although my favourite New York Times LCFC WTF? headline was before the 2016 ManU game, when they said Leicester City had made it to the "championship game" -- it is important to remember, writers don't write their headlines.