Entitled fans or realistic fans?

[VLC86]

27 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

And the vast swathes of irrational ones?

I still think they are a massively minority, just more vocal.

[Detroit Blues]

Like any fan group, you're always going to have supporters that fall on the spectrum from blissfully optimistic to annoyingly cynical. I believe that how the club has fared throughout the years helps to mold the fanbase. Leicester City's past has certainly caused some supporters to cling to pessimism/cynicism in order to protect themselves from being hurt by a poor run of form or a late goal. However, the last six years of success has rightfully changed where Leicester City fits in the landscape of world football.

 

I think that if FT is an adequate representation of Leicester supporters, than I would say they have handled the highs and lows as reasonably well as you could hope. Most Leicester fans understand the ridiculous nature of being disappointed by only finishing in 5th place in the Premier League last season. Most Leicester fans can both know that Brendan Rodgers is one of the best managers we've had, and realize that he can also get it wrong. The issue is in how to properly articulate that nuance. The internet is certainly not a great medium for doing that.

 

I follow quite a few teams/sports, and this place is by far the least toxic forum

 

 

 

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Stadt said:

The injuries are hugely important, but the team we put out against Fulham was still far better than their’s. Not just under Rodgers but our whole team has the propensity to play far worse than the sum of our parts 

It does. People didn't want to hear it when Puel was here, but as I said then we had and a lot of young players and players making their debuts in this league and that will mean inconsistency. Add that in with so many injuries and having to play squad players who we really only ever expected to be emergency squad filler and it's a problem. 

 

Someone made a very valid point the other day about the clubs MO is signing up and coming players. If people agree with that, then they need to accept hand in hand with that will come inconsistency.

 

I've been critical of Rodgers in how he's setting us up and I think he has been negative before we even had the injuries. But, at this moment in time if he doesn't trust us in a 4 at the back, it's going to hamstring us in what he can do to turn it around. 

[Stadt]

29 minutes ago, Babylon said:

It does. People didn't want to hear it when Puel was here, but as I said then we had and a lot of young players and players making their debuts in this league and that will mean inconsistency. Add that in with so many injuries and having to play squad players who we really only ever expected to be emergency squad filler and it's a problem. 

 

Someone made a very valid point the other day about the clubs MO is signing up and coming players. If people agree with that, then they need to accept hand in hand with that will come inconsistency.

 

I've been critical of Rodgers in how he's setting us up and I think he has been negative before we even had the injuries. But, at this moment in time if he doesn't trust us in a 4 at the back, it's going to hamstring us in what he can do to turn it around. 

 Don’t think it’s a coincidence ugh on all of our players have off days at the same time. When we’re bad, we’re bad to a man, I can’t really remember any of our players performing well when we’ve lost - to me, that suggests there’s something deeper than just inconsistency. 
 

Not trusting us in a four is a legitimate concern but Rodgers shoots himself in the foot with his selections. Playing Maddison and Praet as our widest forward players against Wolves seemed incredibly short sighted at the time, the game panned out as exactly as it looked like it would and we were spared an awful attacking performance by a soft penalty. We then played the same XI (or almost the same) against Fulham, were we obviously lost. I don’t think doing that can really be excused and it’s not entitlement to be fed up of repeated mistakes.

 

This year has been uncomfortably similar to Puel’s tenure. It made sense why we were so drab under Claude; he’s an awful man manager, definitely not an orator and an uninventive coach. Rodgers is none of those and has a better squad, so it’s annoying we’ve been poor offensively for most of the year. Injuries have taken their toll but our issues run far deeper 

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Stadt said:

 Don’t think it’s a coincidence ugh on all of our players have off days at the same time. When we’re bad, we’re bad to a man, I can’t really remember any of our players performing well when we’ve lost - to me, that suggests there’s something deeper than just inconsistency. 

Oh it’s not just that, I think it’s a culmination of a number of things certainly not just age or inexperience bringing about inconsistency. It just doesn’t help.

 

I think we lack some mental strength and leaders as well.

[Bourbon Fox]

14 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

if they moan and whine and hyperbolically demand players dropped and managers sacked then yes, I'd argue that betrays a sense of weird, entitlement, born from a lack of a wider perspective. 

RODGERS IN