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
lcfc043

Top

By lcfc043, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

AjcW

AjcW

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, foxinsocks said:

Top has a difgivukt road abd vichia a hard act to follow.

This is an opportunity for Top to assert his authority and leadership.  It would be better for him to redolve it now rather than thru events

Dad, is that you? 

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lako42

Lako42

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, itude said:

To those above trying to "unblame" Top, he is the owner for heavens sake, do you think he has no responsibilty at all in this mess we find ourselves in then ??

Nobody has said that. 

 

What they have said is that it's wibble of the highest order to suggest he and his family should move on or aren't good enough to be owners of this club. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
volpeazzurro

volpeazzurro

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Lako42 said:

Nobody has said that. 

 

What they have said is that it's wibble of the highest order to suggest he and his family should move on or aren't good enough to be owners of this club. 

 

 

Exactly. As I said before, nobody has a clue what's happening it's just sheer guesswork! They probably sounded Potter out ages ago and found out about the 20m clause. That and 10m for Dunderhead was never going to happen. 

 

Like transfers, if they keep those close to their chests they certainly are a new manager! I doubt very much that something isn't going on behind the scenes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DanDare

DanDare

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, taupe said:

I don't think Top runs KP all on his own you know. 

It's unfortunate, Top's more a football fan, his dad was the hardened businessman. 

Top's in need of those around him to pay a visit to the bone shop and find themselves a spine cos they're obviously way out of their depth.

Edited by DanDare
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil Bowman

Phil Bowman

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, CrispinLA in Texas said:

Come on Top....we've stalled, get into gear and move this club forward or we're going to be left behind 

This is very poor advice and I hope Top doesn’t follow it.

 

If we’ve stalled he should make sure we’re in neutral before restarting. Only then should he get into gear and then think about moving forward - if it is safe to do so.

 

What in the world is worse than a poorly thought-through analogy? Nothing, that’s what. Literally nothing.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
taupe

taupe

Posted
Posted

True true. Analogies rarely extend themselves beyond the original intended context, even when they work there. 

 

As a related aside, I don't think you can successfully critique an argument by picking holes in any analogy used. It can sometimes completely miss the point.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Mickyblueeyes

Mickyblueeyes

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

For those who are saying Top doesn’t make all the decision or shouldn’t be held responsible - he is chairman of the board. Overall owner. 
 

Any business owner/chairman personally takes responsibility for all failures. It’s what makes them what they are. Believe me, this is something his late father would’ve drummed into him - the buck stops with us, son. 
 

My business is no where near the turnover of LCFC. However, I take responsibility for my staff, for our failures, for our shortcomings. I use to take responsibility in my previous director roles where I wasn’t the overall owner. It’s the nature of the role.  It’s the only way we get better. This isn’t some middle management position or some new kid on the board block. This is a multi billionaire running one of many businesses - I’m yet to meet one who didn’t expect to be held accountable. 
 

Trust me, he expects us to hold him personally responsible. So does Susan Whelan, Simon Capper and the rest of the board. and if they don’t, they are not fit for purpose.
 

 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phil Bowman

Phil Bowman

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, taupe said:

True true. Analogies rarely extend themselves beyond the original intended context, even when they work there. 

 

As a related aside, I don't think you can successfully critique an argument by picking holes in any analogy used. It can sometimes completely miss the point.

Not sure how ‘related’ this aside is, at least to my post, as I was critiquing the analogy and not the argument.

 

I would agree that finding fault with an analogy does not necessarily constitute a successful counter-argument in and of itself. But in this instance that was not my intent.

 

However, when a point is made through analogy alone, I accept that it is not always clear, or easy to distinguish, between a reply which is targeted at the (weak, in this case) analogy) and one which takes aim at  the argumentative point. One of several reasons why using an analogy to make a point is to build a house on the sand, and best avoided unless for comic effect.

 

But even then the analogy has to hold water.

Edited by Phil Bowman
To expand my point by waffling on tediously.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Col city fan

Col city fan

Posted
Posted

I’m still finding it hard to fathom how a club that won the league in 2016 can then have gone on to sign so many poor players, giving them big contracts, to end up in the situation we find ourselves in now.

We’ve gone from having the reputation as the best run ‘family’ club in England, to become a bit of a laughing stock in some quarters. 
Whether this will last, I bloody hope not. It’s depressing seeing Leicester rooted at the bottom of the division, with a manager earning huge wages who doesn’t seem to know what to do with this squad. 
And the lack of transparency, vision for the future, just this general ‘apathy’ to do anything much at all (at least, looking in from the outside), is just perplexing. 
Any other club I think would have binned off Dodgers by now, yet we are hearing nothing.

Its hard to work out at the moment.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest itude

Guest itude

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Lako42 said:

Nobody has said that. 

 

What they have said is that it's wibble of the highest order to suggest he and his family should move on or aren't good enough to be owners of this club. 

 

 

 

17 hours ago, Lako42 said:

Nobody has said that. 

 

What they have said is that it's wibble of the highest order to suggest he and his family should move on or aren't good enough to be owners of this club. 

 

 

I don't think anyone has referred to his family ??.Clearly his dad was good enough, and more ! We are just expressing our concern that from what we can see, he might not be handling this very well at all.

What exactly is wrong with that ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
taupe

taupe

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Phil Bowman said:

Not sure how ‘related’ this aside is, at least to my post, as I was critiquing the analogy and not the argument.

 

I would agree that finding fault with an analogy does not necessarily constitute a successful counter-argument in and of itself. But in this instance that was not my intent.

 

However, when a point is made through analogy alone, I accept that it is not always clear, or easy to distinguish, between a reply which is targeted at the (weak, in this case) analogy) and one which takes aim at  the argumentative point. One of several reasons why using an analogy to make a point is to build a house on the sand, and best avoided unless for comic effect.

 

But even then the analogy has to hold water.

My apologies if my imprecise response caused you concern, It was not my intention to suggest you were critiquing the argument via the analogy. It was simply that your post reminded me of people that do do that, and how it bugs me when they think they've scored by simply by pointing out a contradiction (or whatever) in the analogy. It simply does not necessarily transfer to the argument.  

 

I agree totally with the bit I highlighted in bold. I feel an analogy has a limited life (and I'd not considered the comedy one, so thank you for that) - it's good only for the point being made. It can illustrate the point, and a well chosen analogy does that really well, but it isn't in itself the argument. I suspect, from what you've said, that I'm preaching to the converted!  :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Royston.

Royston.

Posted
Posted

He needs to make a statement. The piece in the matchday program recently only denied the club is in financial turmoil and didn't touch the onfield shenanigans.

 

Something honest like,

 

"King Power oversaw the greatest achievements in this clubs history so please get behind the players and manager as we drop like a stone back into the shìt"

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...