Who is in charge?

[Harboro]

15 minutes ago, cruzFOX said:

During our hay days vichai was a constant presence at the ground. Not just in meetings but he was everywhere! Changing rooms, meeting players before and after games, charity events etc he properly led by example no matter what. He still had a global empire to control but he made himself available. Now I don’t know Top and I’m not going to blame him for recent times as I don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes. Maybe be we are unrealistic is expecting Top to be just like his dad. Even if he tried to he simply can’t. Just goes to show the magnitude of what vichai did for our club. He was larger than life. Top maybe struggling to lead. It’s a huge responsibility that he’s taken on. Times are now challenging and he doesn’t have the experience of his dad.

Vichai built King Power and the executives there would have known he was in charge. With his passing there is probably a need for Top to be more involved there familiarising himself further with the day to day running, staking a claim vs other family members (mother, siblings) and executives vying for more influence. No surprise he doesn’t have as much time to be in Leicester for what is not their main moneymaker, even if he has the emotional attachment to the club he will have to think pragmatically.

Edited 5 March by Harboro

[TheStig]

The club is not "small business". A business the size of Leicester City in a "market" as volatile as football does require full time hands-on - especially in periods of crises which we seemingly have been for a couple of years. So for 3 years we seem to have repeated the mistakes with the same results - or lack of. We still have the same administrational staff (more or less). Top is still "far away" and is not signalling 100% commitment. Rudkin has been at the club since he was in shorts and has multiple functions as personal waiter for Top, and Whelan is in no way a footballing person and is supposedly leaning on her husband. So we actually seem to have a top management (no pun intended) that is just flowing with the stream and acting as obstacles appear along the way. That for both Top and Rudkin is at most part-time work. So the question is how can we expect to succeed with a disfunctional set-up that has proven not to function? I don´t get....

[Babylon]

55 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

1. That wasn't suggested by me. It was initially suggested by John Percy and several other reliable media members.

2. Rudkin does not report into Susan Whelan, he reports directly into Top as has also been reported.

3. Rudkin also sits next to Top at every match, which is their in plain sight. Whelan sits on the row behind.

4. This is addition to several other anecdotal accounts both said on here, in the press and lots of other stuff I've heard.

You said she has nothing to do with football. The same press people have said she got involved in transfers, so it sort of negates the original point. She was also the club’s representative at premier league meetings and heavily involved there, which also negates that’s she’s not involved in football matters. 
 

Nobody said he reports to directly to Susan Whelan, they said she out ranks him. Which she does as CEO and board member. 

Edited 5 March by Babylon

[CosbehFox]

We can clarify one of Rudkin’s responsibilities.
 

Tanner on the latest BSLB pod openly talke about him wanting top prices for LCFC players - as a result, that would suggest he had a pretty good handle on ‘values’ of players coming in as well if he’s the negotiator for outgoings too. 

Edited 5 March by CosbehFox

[Leicesterpool]

Interesting how Kasper leaves, everything began to go wrong. Would you ever bring back Kasper as manager? All our success seem to happen around him.

[Chocolate Teapot]

1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

We can clarify one of Rudkin’s responsibilities.
 

Tanner on the latest BSLB pod openly takes about him wanting top prices for LCFC players - as a result, that would suggest he had a pretty good handle on ‘values’ of playing coming in as well if he’s the negotiator for outgoings too. 

@Babylon

[foxinsocks]

1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

We can clarify one of Rudkin’s responsibilities.
 

Tanner on the latest BSLB pod openly takes about him wanting top prices for LCFC players - as a result, that would suggest he had a pretty good handle on ‘values’ of playing coming in as well if he’s the negotiator for outgoings too. 

Lcfc have failed to sell unwanted players. Out on loan... out of mind seems to be the view.  Yet we are often paying most of the wages... if we have broken ffp it's not coz we have over spent its coz we haven't sold.... look at musa, slimani, bekovic cases. More recently, somare, thomas... ward is still our player!

Let's face it JR is poor at selling. 

[foxinsocks]

1 hour ago, Leicesterpool said:

Interesting how Kasper leaves, everything began to go wrong. Would you ever bring back Kasper as manager? All our success seem to happen around him.

One day kasper will tell his story

[Babylon]

On 05/03/2024 at 19:17, Chocolate Teapot said:

@Babylon

His valuation on players going out is going to be influenced by what we've paid for them and what we need to recoup for them for the books. It's entirely different to the valuation of a player coming into the club from somewhere else, spotted by someone else, watched exclusively by the scouting team and not him. Tanner did not say it; the OP is surmising that based on him waiting x amount for players. 

[Chrysalis]

On 05/03/2024 at 12:15, Babylon said:

People want to look for an easy answer, or a boogie man. The reality is exceptionally complex, from the death of Vichai, to the ultimate power now being with his wife, and not Top (who knows what differences that made in terms of backing). To covid smashing the finances, and the powers that be at UEFA and the Premier league deciding to change FFP rules again. To the club (Top and KP ultimately) deciding to back Rodgers with money rather than sell an asset, which had been our MO for some time.

 

Chuck in the training ground and ground expansion hoovering up money, hiring Rodger's mate as head of recruitment, to not sacking Rodger's early enough. All clubs facing a squeeze financially so that it makes it harder to shift players. To players now being so rich, they will happily just sit out contracts to get the moves (or money) they want. 

 

A load of things all added together that will then create other knock on problems. It's a swirling mess of issues, that no one person is to blame for, with many external factors playing a huge part. 

 

In terms of who is in charge, ultimately it's the KP board and Vichai's wife. We can't possibly know what influence, if any they have. What we do know is Top personally lent the club money out of his own pocket and not that of KP. So it does somewhat hint at a disconnect there in terms of appetite, but again we will likely never know unless someone breaks ranks.

There does seem to be a disproportionate amount of blame being placed at Rudkin's door.

 

I am ok accepting he oversee's the scouting setup, choice of player recruitment, maybe has a say on manager recruitment,

 

But there is no way he is charge of player budget, financing, that sort of thing, there will be someone above him making those sort of decisions, whether its top, his brother, whelan or someone else.

 

Also whelan supposedly not involved in football decisions, deciding how much money is available in a budget for things like transfers and wages is not a footballing deicision, its a financing decision, a footballing decision is things like whether to sack/hire a manager, sign players and so forth.  It would be unusual for her as CEO to at the very least not be overseeing rudkin's department.   I think the style of play desired by the club is something coming from top himself, I suspect it possibly goes further from the choice of manager to even being imposed on managers, I felt was odd the temporary managers last season started with a different style then suddenly changed afterwards.  Would also explain why rodgers had a tendency to suddenly switch back after we ended a bad run of games.

Edited 7 March by Chrysalis

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, Chrysalis said:

There does seem to be a disproportionate amount of blame being placed at Rudkin's door.

 

I am ok accepting he oversee's the scouting setup, choice of player recruitment, maybe has a say on manager recruitment,

 

But there is no way he is charge of player budget, financing, that sort of thing, there will be someone above him making those sort of decisions, whether its top, his brother, whelan or someone else.

 

Also whelan supposedly not involved in football decisions, deciding how much money is available in a budget for things like transfers and wages is not a footballing deicision, its a financing decision, a footballing decision is things like whether to sack/hire a manager, sign players and so forth.  I think the style of play desired by the club is something coming from top himself, I suspect it possibly goes further from the choice of manager to even being imposed on managers, I felt was odd the temporary managers last season started with a different style then suddenly changed afterwards.

They all take the blame, as you day he didn't sign off the decisions or plans. It goes through Top and the board and the CEO. 

 

Either blame the man at the very top, or spread the blame around. 

[Tommy G]

Good grief this is painful.

 

Anyone who is suggesting Susan Whelan isn't hands on, or doesnt make decisions, or doesnt know about players etc etc is just plain wrong. She is the CEO an in charge of every single aspect of the club, employed by the shareholders (in this case Top and his family) to run the show.

 

She is ultimately responsible for the suceess and it's at the discretion and opinion of the shareholders whether she has been succesful and to continue in her role, not us or anyone else.  

[pkonline]

People forget Khun Vichai was the Chairman when we broke FFP in 2013 and got subsequently fined!

[CosbehFox]

4 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Good grief this is painful.

 

Anyone who is suggesting Susan Whelan isn't hands on, or doesnt make decisions, or doesnt know about players etc etc is just plain wrong. She is the CEO an in charge of every single aspect of the club, employed by the shareholders (in this case Top and his family) to run the show.

 

She is ultimately responsible for the suceess and it's at the discretion and opinion of the shareholders whether she has been succesful and to continue in her role, not us or anyone else.  

So you are suggesting then she has a say in the footballing matters? 

[Fox92]

1 minute ago, CosbehFox said:

So you are suggesting then she has a say in the footballing matters? 

I thought she got involved with certain transfers because they weren't moving quickly (for instance Fofona)?

[Chrysalis]

6 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Good grief this is painful.

 

Anyone who is suggesting Susan Whelan isn't hands on, or doesnt make decisions, or doesnt know about players etc etc is just plain wrong. She is the CEO an in charge of every single aspect of the club, employed by the shareholders (in this case Top and his family) to run the show.

 

She is ultimately responsible for the suceess and the current situation and it's at the discretion and opinion of the shareholders whether she has been succesful and to continue in her role, not us or anyone else.  

Edited for you, as you seemed to be a bit picky on what she has overseen.

[Chrysalis]

6 minutes ago, pkonline said:

People forget Khun Vichai was the Chairman when we broke FFP in 2013 and got subsequently fined!

Not forgotten but I think there is clear differences, that was temporary on the way to higher riches, whilst the most recent breach is after we already got there and topped out our income.  The 2013 example was also done with clear purpose, whilst whats happened now is a bit odd, in that if we do fail (yes its not confirmed yet) we did so whilst crippling ourselves that final summer.  I think Vichai wouldnt have let that situation come about in the first place, but if it was there, he either would have stuck two fingers up at it, or made sure we didnt break it, not a weird middle ground.  Trying to comply when you have already failed is probably going to be pointless.

[CosbehFox]

2 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

I thought she got involved with certain transfers because they weren't moving quickly (for instance Fofona)?

Apparently so because Rudkin couldn't do she had to step in as clubs found easier to deal with and she worked better at PL meetings too. 

 

I am playing devil advocate's here on two points because if we adopt the strict 'we don't know that' - well how does Tommy know that Whelan is involved in everything and second point, it's worrying if Whelan has any say into footballing matters given her zero experience of the game (At the time of taking the role). 

[Chocolate Teapot]

19 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Good grief this is painful.

 

Anyone who is suggesting Susan Whelan isn't hands on, or doesnt make decisions, or doesnt know about players etc etc is just plain wrong. She is the CEO an in charge of every single aspect of the club, employed by the shareholders (in this case Top and his family) to run the show.

 

She is ultimately responsible for the suceess and it's at the discretion and opinion of the shareholders whether she has been succesful and to continue in her role, not us or anyone else.  

This isn't true.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/05/28/complacency-leicester-relegated-premier-league/

 

She's in charge of the commercial operation, it's been reported several times that's the case. There's culpability there obviously but equally the commercial side of the business is far less in terms of revenue than the football side of the business.

[Tommy G]

4 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Apparently so because Rudkin couldn't do she had to step in as clubs found easier to deal with and she worked better at PL meetings too. 

 

I am playing devil advocate's here on two points because if we adopt the strict 'we don't know that' - well how does Tommy know that Whelan is involved in everything and second point, it's worrying if Whelan has any say into footballing matters given her zero experience of the game (At the time of taking the role). 

Because I know any CEO who is worth their salt gets under the skin of everything in the business they operate in, especially large transactions which in our case historically have been a handful a year. 

 

[CosbehFox]

3 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Because I know any CEO who is worth their salt gets under the skin of everything in the business they operate in, especially large transactions which in our case historically have been a handful a year. 

 

You are assuming on your expectation of how a business operates. No traditional business has a Director of Football who sits next to the defacto owner and gets an invite to his wedding whilst his CEO doesn't. 

Edited 7 March by CosbehFox

[Chrysalis]

6 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

This isn't true.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/05/28/complacency-leicester-relegated-premier-league/

 

She's in charge of the commercial operation, it's been reported several times that's the case. There's culpability there obviously but equally the commercial side of the business is far less in terms of revenue than the football side of the business.

This same article states she is still involved in the financial side of whats going on including player transfers, and a lot of our problems are "financial".  I think there will be "someone" above Rudkin regardless of the exact delegation of duties. 

I think you have misinterpreted what football decisions mean, it means things like picking the manager and the players, it doesnt mean not being involved in footballing related finances.

[Chocolate Teapot]

6 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

This same article states she is still involved in the financial side of whats going on including player transfers, and a lot of our problems are "financial".  I think there will be "someone" above Rudkin regardless of the exact delegation of duties. 

I think you have misinterpreted what football decisions mean, it means things like picking the manager and the players, it doesnt mean not being involved in footballing related finances.

Ultimately though the vast majority of financial problems result from overpaying players, not being able to shift them and getting relegated. That feels pretty straight forward to me.

 

I'll give you it's a bizarre non sensical structure.

Edited 7 March by Chocolate Teapot

[Chrysalis]

2 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

Ultimately though the vast majority of financial problems result from overpaying players, not being able to shift them and getting relegated. That feels pretty straight forward to me.

 

I'll give you it's a bizarre non sensical structure.

Sadly we left speculating due to all the silence from the club.  I guess they think with no statements, its a case of speculation is the worst it gets for them.

[filbertway]

51 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

She is ultimately responsible for the suceess and it's at the discretion and opinion of the shareholders whether she has been succesful and to continue in her role, not us or anyone else.  

And anyone with an iota of brain power can see that they're clearly incompetent if they judge the past few years as successful decision making.

 

There's literally no point having a forum or even talking about anything if you can only talk about things you have direct control over