Notts F & Everton admit to breaking rules and face points deduction

[Babylon]

4 hours ago, mozartfox said:

Can we please request Babble-on to guest on BSLB, as there are likely many on FT that are doubtless interested into the reasons for his continued support of Rudkin.  I think this would raise listening numbers by a large chunk.

 

To understand how a DoF is not in any way responsible for football matters at our Club is a mystery to many.  So any explanation would by eye-opening.

 

2 hours ago, 1972 Fox said:

I think it's fair to say that @Babylon does not like to admit that he could be wrong and it's quite clear that he always likes to have the last word in any debate/argument.

 

He is entrenched with his opinions in defending Rudkin and it's doubtful that he will concede any ground.

 

You see, it's shit like this that makes me think what's the point. Do you even bother to read the posts? I've said god knows how many times, that Rudkin is clearly going to take a portion of the blame. I've said numerous times in the last two pages, I think he's culpable for appointing a poor head of recruitment (a huge problem as most of the others stem from it). I've said times over the years, I believe there has, at times, been a serious lack of forwarding planning, amongst numerous other things. 

 

Just because I don't join in with the sad little bandwagon of trying to put the blame at one man's feet, doesn't mean I like him, or that he's good at his job. 

 

 

[Claudio Fannieri]

I don’t think Rudkin is deemed as the antichrist or that there is some sort of witch hunt. He is employed in a very senior role within the club and just like the manager, who bears the brunt and responsibility for performances on the pitch, then Rudkin has to be accountable for the football operations side of the business for which FFP is a critical element, the fact we are in danger of breaching the rules, the fact we have paid over the odds in both transfer fees and wages to some very average players has very much left us in a perilous position, surely for that reason his performance should be under a level of scrutiny. 

[Babylon]

55 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

With most major positions in large corporations, the person employed at the very top normally takes responsibility for the results, both good and bad - in the case of LCFC this must include the DoF.   So in this case, is Rudkin a lap dog just doing what he is told?  Of course, we do not know the answer to this, but on the evidence of how of the Club has been run recently (prior to this season) and looking at FFP issues, there have been some major decision making failures which cannot all be down to the Owners , or else why employ senior officials?

 

Unfortunately the lack of engagement by the Club is not helpful.  Thank God we have the Foxes Trust.

He isn't at the top, though; there are numerous people above him, The last time I looked, he wasn't even on the board; He's middle management. And this is exactly one of my points: either apportion blame around everyone or make the buck stop at the top. And the top is... well, Top... in fact, the top might actually be his mother, who is the Chairwoman of Kingpower Board and the person Top is ultimately responsible to.

 

We have absolutely no idea what's happened at KP since Vichai's death, their appetite for the club, their appetite to deal with the debt, etc, that comes with it. Vichai we know, was willing and happy to back the club. An about turn in backing, or appetite for debt alone, can make a massive difference. 

 

Then you have the new FFP, which always seem to get rushed through. Another issue out of our control that we then just had to deal with, and try to react to. Go back in time and everyone was screaming "why aren't we buying anyone", I was one of a few voices pointing out the new rules were a massive issue. Now we are seeing points deductions, people seem to have got the idea. We were a successful club, we were trying to keep our best players and invest in new ones for European campaigns, that comes with big wages and money spent. The same people now saying we overspent will no doubt be the same ones who were screaming, "Buy more players" when chasing the top 4. If people were honest, the issue isn't what we spent; it's that we picked the wrong players; nobody cared we paid £25m for Maddison and gave him good money. 

 

Does Susan Whelan strike you as a fool, do people think if she thought it was all at his door, like people on here do, he wouldn't have got the tin tack by now. Or do we think that perhaps they know there are a few more nuances with what has gone wrong over the years, and he's going to take a portion of the blame, along with everyone else involved? 

 

 

 

 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

When do we find out Notts Forest's deduction?

[Chocolate Teapot]

34 minutes ago, Babylon said:

 

You see, it's shit like this that makes me think what's the point. Do you even bother to read the posts? I've said god knows how many times, that Rudkin is clearly going to take a portion of the blame. I've said numerous times in the last two pages, I think he's culpable for appointing a poor head of recruitment (a huge problem as most of the others stem from it). I've said times over the years, I believe there has, at times, been a serious lack of forwarding planning, amongst numerous other things. 

 

Just because I don't join in with the sad little bandwagon of trying to put the blame at one man's feet, doesn't mean I like him, or that he's good at his job. 

 

 

Your argument that Rudkin doesn't value the players, he merely negotiates the deals perhaps explains why many talented people have left the club and its probably one shared by Rudkin himself.

 

I'd put money on the internal review blaming the commercial department for our failings last season as opposed to the football department.

[Spudulike]

11 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

When do we find out Notts Forest's deduction?

Early April, it seems. 

 

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/13049423/everton-and-nottingham-forest-charged-q-a-time-frame-points-deduction-what-about-man-city

 

 

[Chocolate Teapot]

17 minutes ago, Babylon said:

 

Does Susan Whelan strike you as a fool, do people think if she thought it was all at his door, like people on here do, he wouldn't have got the tin tack by now. Or do we think that perhaps they know there are a few more nuances with what has gone wrong over the years, and he's going to take a portion of the blame, along with everyone else involved? 

How do YOU know the internal relationships of those at the club?

 

I've worked in organisations where its obvious those at the top don't get on and there's huge politics at play.

 

It's impossible for you even to speculate on that without having some sort of direct line into the top of the organisation?

[Chocolate Teapot]

13 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

When do we find out Notts Forest's deduction?

I think they'll go down without it.

[Babylon]

3 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

How do YOU know the internal relationships of those at the club?

 

I've worked in organisations where its obvious those at the top don't get on and there's huge politics at play.

 

It's impossible for you even to speculate on that without having some sort of direct line into the top of the organisation?

Sorry, I don't get your point. She's well above him in position; he's answerable to her, and she's the CEO and I'm going to presume she wants to run a successful organisation. He wasn't even on the board last time I looked. If she and the board thought he was entirely culpable, he'd be out of a job. If they knew it was all his fault, kept him in place because of some weird politics inside the club, then we have bigger problems than Rudkin don't we. 

[coolhandfox]

20 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

When do we find out Notts Forest's deduction?

It needs to be pretty soon, as I'm sure they will appeal the verdict.

 

It will get messy if it's not sorted in the season; same with Everton. 

 

You can't have a situation where they get deducted points and get relegated because of it, and then appeal and not get relegated. 

[Chocolate Teapot]

9 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Sorry, I don't get your point. She's well above him in position; he's answerable to her, and she's the CEO and I'm going to presume she wants to run a successful organisation. He wasn't even on the board last time I looked. If she and the board thought he was entirely culpable, he'd be out of a job. If they knew it was all his fault, kept him in place because of some weird politics inside the club, then we have bigger problems than Rudkin don't we. 

She's not above him in the organisation 🤣

 

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/1UAVmsqlK4XFtRs8vwatqHuxdO0/appointments

 

https://www.lcfc.com/club/senior-management?lang=en

 

They both report into Top. 

 

If youre going to take up such a ridiculously anchored position, at least do some research. You've had one here pal 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Edited 7 February by Chocolate Teapot

[Babylon]

49 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

She's not above him in the organisation 🤣

 

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/1UAVmsqlK4XFtRs8vwatqHuxdO0/appointments

 

https://www.lcfc.com/club/senior-management?lang=en

 

They both report into Top. 

 

If youre going to take up such a ridiculously anchored position, at least do some research. You've had one here pal 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Oh deary me.

 

Perhaps you could post up the link to the company's house of Leicester City Football Club and not the Trust. You'll find he's not a director, whilst Susan Whelan is.  

 

Susan Whelan doesn't touch the football side... other than when she gets personally involved in the transfers, as people gloriously like to tell us on here, as reported by the Athletic, the Times etc. Or attending the premier league board meetings as the clubs representative. 

 

 

She's CEO, it's literally the highest ranking exec position in a company. She might not choose managers; they employ others for that. But if you are actually suggesting she doesn't outrank him that's laughable. 

 

 

Edited 7 February by Babylon

[Chocolate Teapot]

8 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Oh deary me.

 

Perhaps you could post up the link to the company's house of Leicester City Football Club and not the Trust. You'll find he's not a director, whilst Susan Whelan is.  

 

Susan Whelan doesn't touch the football side... other than when she gets personally involved in the transfers, as people gloriously like to tell us on here, as reported by the Athletic, the Times etc. Or attending the premier league board meetings as the clubs representative. 

 

 

She's CEO, it's literally the highest ranking exec position in a company. She might not choose managers; they employ others for that. But if you are actually suggesting she doesn't outrank him that's laughable. 

 

 

She doesn't outrank him as has been pointed out. You seem to think Leicester is run as a logical organisation when it's clearly not and anyone who's ever worked there will tell you.

 

Who sits next to Top at games by the way?

Edited 7 February by Chocolate Teapot

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Ah direct evidence isn't even enough. Deary me.

You haven't provided direct evidence, you've provided a link to the LCFC Trust and the LCFC website, neither of which are relevant. You've told me she doesn't get involved in the football side, when she clearly actually does, and seemingly don't understand what a CEO actually is.

 

But do carry on. 

[Stadt]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

He isn't at the top, though; there are numerous people above him, The last time I looked, he wasn't even on the board; He's middle management. And this is exactly one of my points: either apportion blame around everyone or make the buck stop at the top. And the top is... well, Top... in fact, the top might actually be his mother, who is the Chairwoman of Kingpower Board and the person Top is ultimately responsible to.

 

We have absolutely no idea what's happened at KP since Vichai's death, their appetite for the club, their appetite to deal with the debt, etc, that comes with it. Vichai we know, was willing and happy to back the club. An about turn in backing, or appetite for debt alone, can make a massive difference. 

 

Then you have the new FFP, which always seem to get rushed through. Another issue out of our control that we then just had to deal with, and try to react to. Go back in time and everyone was screaming "why aren't we buying anyone", I was one of a few voices pointing out the new rules were a massive issue. Now we are seeing points deductions, people seem to have got the idea. We were a successful club, we were trying to keep our best players and invest in new ones for European campaigns, that comes with big wages and money spent. The same people now saying we overspent will no doubt be the same ones who were screaming, "Buy more players" when chasing the top 4. If people were honest, the issue isn't what we spent; it's that we picked the wrong players; nobody cared we paid £25m for Maddison and gave him good money. 

 

Does Susan Whelan strike you as a fool, do people think if she thought it was all at his door, like people on here do, he wouldn't have got the tin tack by now. Or do we think that perhaps they know there are a few more nuances with what has gone wrong over the years, and he's going to take a portion of the blame, along with everyone else involved? 

 

 

 

 

Would you sack Rudkin, yes or no?

[coolhandfox]

Why don't you have the conversation in the Rudkin thread @Babylon and @Chocolate Teapot.

 

It is a bit dull and repetitive. 

[Chocolate Teapot]

3 minutes ago, Babylon said:

You haven't provided direct evidence, you've provided a link to the LCFC Trust and the LCFC website, neither of which are relevant. You've told me she doesn't get involved in the football side, when she clearly actually does, and seemingly don't understand what a CEO actually is.

 

But do carry on. 

Ha. I understand it very well, and that's what I'm trying to explain to you.

 

Leicester City is not run like a normal business, there's loads of evidence to suggest this and anyone you'd speak to who knows something about the club will tell you this. Rudkin is the most powerful person within the organisation as has been reported several times but you still don't get it or want to.

 

If Percy was reporting what you wanted to hear you'd be quoting it but you can't because it isn't.

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

She doesn't outrank him as has been pointed out. You seem to think Leicester is run as a logical organisation when it's clearly not and anyone who's ever worked there will tell you.

 

Who sits next to Top at games by the way?

She's on the board of directors FFS. You tried to tell me he was and laughably posted up the trust. 

 

All you've pointed out is that the Director of Football has more sway in football matters, great revelation there. But failure in that department goes up the chain, and the board of which she is on, is above him. 

[Babylon]

58 minutes ago, Stadt said:

Would you sack Rudkin, yes or no?

If you could provide me with all the knowledge that Top and Susan Whelan have, I'll give you an answer. 

[filbertway]

Are there any other companies where a director has literally no responsibility or is it just Leicester?

[Stadt]

10 minutes ago, Babylon said:

If you could provide me with all the knowledge that Top and Susan Whelan have, I'll give you an answer. 

Would you want anybody replaced behind the scenes, Whelan, Top, Rudkin? Or is it a case of we don't and will never know what's going so it's too difficult to answer?

[Chocolate Teapot]

17 minutes ago, Babylon said:

She's on the board of directors FFS. You tried to tell me he was and laughably posted up the trust. 

 

All you've pointed out is that the Director of Football has more sway in football matters, great revelation there. But failure in that department goes up the chain, and the board of which she is on, is above him. 

He is on the board of directors as was pointed out by the lcfc post and he reports directly into Top as reported by Percy.

 

I'm not sure what else you need to know beyond this.

 

I'm not even going to go into other stuff, it's obvious but you've consistently chosen to be deliberately obtuse.

[BertFill]

Can somebody, please, make it stop??

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

Rudkin is the new Barrie Pierpoint. 

[coolhandfox]

8 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Rudkin is the new Barrie Pierpoint. 

There will never be another Pierpoint