King Power Out

[BrilliantFox]

1 hour ago, CornwallFox said:

He didn't 'let' him run out down. He didn't extend. 

Thank you for saying the same thing twice.

 

Not extending a players' contract means they leave for free.

[ajthefox]

7 minutes ago, BrilliantFox said:

Thank you for saying the same thing twice.

 

Not extending a players' contract means they leave for free.

I think the point is we were trying to get Tielemans to renew for at least a year or so. He chose not to, you can't force a player to sign can you.

[BrilliantFox]

12 minutes ago, ajthefox said:

we were trying to get Tielemans to renew for at least a year or so

If you believe Rudkin & Co were "trying", then thats another conversation in the first place.

 

They've shown us time and time again they can't even get the basics right, what makes you think they made genuine attempts to resolve the Tielemans situation?

 

Its simply pathetic management, anything that requires effort at this club is not done, but when it comes to extending garbage players like Luke Thomas they're quick to settle it.

 

It shows a complete lack of dedication towards their job duties and chosing the cowards way out.

 

Vestegaard contract extension because it was easier than finding a replacement.

Hamza contract extension because it was easier than finding a replacement.

 

But Tielemans? Oh well, that takes too much effort lets just let him run it down.

[Pita]

12 minutes ago, BrilliantFox said:

If you believe Rudkin & Co were "trying", then thats another conversation in the first place.

 

They've shown us time and time again they can't even get the basics right, what makes you think they made genuine attempts to resolve the Tielemans situation?

 

Its simply pathetic management, anything that requires effort at this club is not done, but when it comes to extending garbage players like Luke Thomas they're quick to settle it.

 

It shows a complete lack of dedication towards their job duties and chosing the cowards way out.

 

Vestegaard contract extension because it was easier than finding a replacement.

Hamza contract extension because it was easier than finding a replacement.

 

But Tielemans? Oh well, that takes too much effort lets just let him run it down.

With running the club it’s just boys playing with their toys don’t have a clue and get fed up very quickly 

[Tommy G]

22 minutes ago, BrilliantFox said:

If you believe Rudkin & Co were "trying", then thats another conversation in the first place.

 

They've shown us time and time again they can't even get the basics right, what makes you think they made genuine attempts to resolve the Tielemans situation?

 

Its simply pathetic management, anything that requires effort at this club is not done, but when it comes to extending garbage players like Luke Thomas they're quick to settle it.

 

It shows a complete lack of dedication towards their job duties and chosing the cowards way out.

 

Vestegaard contract extension because it was easier than finding a replacement.

Hamza contract extension because it was easier than finding a replacement.

 

But Tielemans? Oh well, that takes too much effort lets just let him run it down.

If you were in Tieleman's position would you tie yourself down to LCFC? He won the FA Cup for us. He's ambitious and believe it or not players have their eyes open to opportunities and bigger clubs than us. He was at the peak of his career and had the opportunity to play at a bigger club and get a mega signing on bonus. 

 

We probably could of kept him if we completely smashed our wage structure, but that was probably unlikely. 

 

Not defending Rudkin and Co as they have plenty of history of bad deals, but not everything is black and white like you suggest. 

 

If you think extending Luke Thomas' contract is comparable to Tielemans then..........

[Tommy G]

14 hours ago, Donwebbio said:

Absolute shambles that a month has now passed since news broke about the plan to revamp the off-field football operations with no appointment, no timeline, no update. Transfer window opens in 2 weeks and we will be making signings (maybe) with the old set up. Typically slow and indecisive way of conducting business which will have a knock on effect for the club's future. 

It's not a job you sling on indeed and hope for the best. High calibre recruitment takes time.

 

There is also a large chance they will mess it up, either way they aren't coming out with a ''timeline'' or ''update'' - the update will be when it happens. 

 

Don't get excited about the Jan trf window either, we probably don't have any money to spend and its a tough window to operate. 

[BrilliantFox]

14 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

If you were in Tieleman's position would you tie yourself down to LCFC? He won the FA Cup for us. He's ambitious and believe it or not players have their eyes open to opportunities and bigger clubs than us. He was at the peak of his career and had the opportunity to play at a bigger club and get a mega signing on bonus. 

 

We probably could of kept him if we completely smashed our wage structure, but that was probably unlikely. 

 

Not defending Rudkin and Co as they have plenty of history of bad deals, but not everything is black and white like you suggest. 

 

If you think extending Luke Thomas' contract is comparable to Tielemans then..........

Your argument falls flat because Tielemans did not go to a PSG, Arsenal or Man City.

 

We were competing for UCL spots while he was here. We were winning trophies.

 

You're literally slagging Tielemans off (a victim of Rudkin's incompetence) when you deep down know that our board mis-managed his contract situation.

 

Tielemans happily went to Villa in 22/23 summer who finished 7th that year after being saved by Emery during a relegation battle, completely blows the argument of him only wanting a top club.

Edited 16 December 2025 by BrilliantFox

[Tommy G]

Just now, BrilliantFox said:

Your argument falls flat because Tielemans did not go to a PSG, Arsenal or Man City.

 

We were competing for UCL spots while he was here. We were winning trophies.

 

You're literally slagging Tielemans off when you deep down know that our board mis-managed his contract situation.

 

Tielemans happily went to Villa in 22/23 who finished 7th that year, completely blows the argument of him only wanting a top club.

I said he wanted a bigger club - and Villa can offer more money. Not sure why you're getting your knickers in a twist about it. 

 

There isn't option A) PSG, Arsenal and Man City then option B) Leicester City. There are a whole host of clubs here and in the rest of Europe that are a better option financially and when taking the blue specs off, much bigger.

[CornwallFox]

1 hour ago, BrilliantFox said:

Thank you for saying the same thing twice.

 

Not extending a players' contract means they leave for free.

They didn't not extend. He didn't extend. 

They didn't allow him to leave for free, he used his contract to leave for free. 

[ajthefox]

51 minutes ago, BrilliantFox said:

If you believe Rudkin & Co were "trying", then thats another conversation in the first place.

 

They've shown us time and time again they can't even get the basics right, what makes you think they made genuine attempts to resolve the Tielemans situation?

 

Its simply pathetic management, anything that requires effort at this club is not done, but when it comes to extending garbage players like Luke Thomas they're quick to settle it.

 

It shows a complete lack of dedication towards their job duties and chosing the cowards way out.

 

Vestegaard contract extension because it was easier than finding a replacement.

Hamza contract extension because it was easier than finding a replacement.

 

But Tielemans? Oh well, that takes too much effort lets just let him run it down.

I just don't think Tielemans wanted to stay. There was at least one interview with him the summer before he left where the subject was raised with him and an offer was clearly on the table.

 

As Tommy said, comparing him to Thomas, Vestergaard and Hamza is apples and oranges, they're an entirely different calibre of player.

 

To be clear I'm not defending the club, I assume we could've done more one way or another but it's not like we were cheating out on wages at the time is it? Ultimately I just don't think Tielemans wanted to stay and it probably would've taken something silly to get him to.

[OntarioFox]

22 minutes ago, BrilliantFox said:

Your argument falls flat because Tielemans did not go to a PSG, Arsenal or Man City.

 

We were competing for UCL spots while he was here. We were winning trophies.

 

You're literally slagging Tielemans off (a victim of Rudkin's incompetence) when you deep down know that our board mis-managed his contract situation.

 

Tielemans happily went to Villa in 22/23 summer who finished 7th that year after being saved by Emery during a relegation battle, completely blows the argument of him only wanting a top club.

That'll be the Villa that are qualifying for Europe every year and are in with a real shout of winning the league?

 

If anything he saw the writing on the wall with our paper tiger of a club and moved to one where that could be offered on a more sustainable basis.

 

Edited 16 December 2025 by OntarioFox

[john ridley]

There wasn't  exactly  a queue  of clubs after him even on a free ,and during the first season there it looked like he was going to be sent out on loan as he couldn't  get enough game time.Granted he's  playing well now but the last season  here he was a disgrace which for me clouded his good years abit .

Edited 16 December 2025 by john ridley

[Dan]

If Tielemans wasn't willing to sign they should've sold.

[1972 Fox]

26 minutes ago, Dan said:

If Tielemans wasn't willing to sign they should've sold.

Agreed. The new contract negotiations started approx two years before he left on a free in 2023.

 

He made it fairly obvious he wasn't going to sign an extension so should've been sold for a reasonable fee.

[Tommy G]

29 minutes ago, Dan said:

If Tielemans wasn't willing to sign they should've sold.

And his agent would of been in every interested clubs ear and said ''hang on 12 months mate and you can get him for free*''

 

* and a nice signing on fee and a fat agents fee to boot.  

 

We aren't the first club to let a decent player go on a free, it happens all the time!

 

A lot of captain hindsights on this forum. 

[HighPeakFox]

Also, the club gambled on getting UCL. To do that they thought they'd gamble on keeping Tielemans. 

 

It failed. 

[Foxin_Mad]

To be honest the biggest issue is the utter shite we signed, players come and go but really since the Puel Era we have struggled to bring in much real quality. Perhaps due to the stupid style we play. 

[Fox92]

10 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

And his agent would of been in every interested clubs ear and said ''hang on 12 months mate and you can get him for free*''

 

* and a nice signing on fee and a fat agents fee to boot.  

 

We aren't the first club to let a decent player go on a free, it happens all the time!

 

A lot of captain hindsights on this forum. 

A player, in his prime, leaving for free doesn't happen all the time in the Premier League really. There's a difference between "decent" and a player such as Tielemans. Off the top of my head I can't recall many great players, in their prime, going for free. Trent this summer is probably the best player to leave for free since Sol Campbell.

 

The club probably gambled on Tielemans staying. Gambled on trying to get into Europe again. And in that regards we aren't the first club to gamble and get it wrong.

Edited 16 December 2025 by Fox92

[Foxin_Mad]

38 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

A player, in his prime, leaving for free doesn't happen all the time in the Premier League really. There's a difference between "decent" and a player such as Tielemans. Off the top of my head I can't recall many great players, in their prime, going for free. Trent this summer is probably the best player to leave for free since Sol Campbell.

 

The club probably gambled on Tielemans staying. Gambled on trying to get into Europe again. And in that regards we aren't the first club to gamble and get it wrong.

I dont really mind the club gambling a bit, it was just that they managed to assemble with the help of Rodgers, Rudkin and co one of the most spineless sides I have ever seen

Edited 16 December 2025 by Foxin_Mad

[1972 Fox]

36 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

Trent this summer is probably the best player to leave for free since Sol Campbell.

Liverpool managed to coax £10m out of Real Madrid with an early agreement for them to sign him before his contract expired.

 

Edited 16 December 2025 by 1972 Fox

[Dan]

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

And his agent would of been in every interested clubs ear and said ''hang on 12 months mate and you can get him for free*''

 

* and a nice signing on fee and a fat agents fee to boot.  

 

We aren't the first club to let a decent player go on a free, it happens all the time!

 

A lot of captain hindsights on this forum. 

I'd have been having these conversations way before a year - probably the summer of 2021 if he wasn't committing. We'd have also been able to sell him for loads if the clubs you were mentioning were interested, especially given what he'd just done in the FA Cup final.

 

It happens but it happens to us totally disproportionately to other clubs and it's a sign of the incompetence. That was the summer we also didn't sell anybody and unsurprisingly our entire 'model' went to pot.

 

If Leicester City were relying on making the Champions League then that is frankly utterly irresponsible, and also given we didn't get anywhere even close to it in 2021/22, where were the repercussions? We just plodded on and the rest is history.

Edited 16 December 2025 by Dan

[Mickyblueeyes]

Tielemans leaving on a free was a kick in the teeth. Could we have dropped him to the reserve s and forced a sale ? Perhaps but we wouldve significantly reduced the asset and no one expected the drop in application and effort we saw in the last season. I don’t think most on this forum would’ve accepted it at the time. Very hard for the club to control and we won’t be the first. Guehi will be leaving Palace for free - albeit a bit more blame on their side. 
 

I mean they get booed by many but guys Mahrez and Maguire at one point did it for Vichai and showed the club the respect it deserved and “signed the contract” when it would’ve been easier to run it down. But they were different class even though both got pissed off with the work of Rudkin in getting them their moves. Tielemans did what was best for him which was his decision and showed very little care for the club in doing so and that’s football now / you can’t blame him for it. Not everyone has the Vichai pull.
 

I don’t know if I look at that or Soyuncu or others leaving on free as one of the top 3 reasons for where we currently are. I do look at being locked into the Rodgers contract - him staying on way too long. The “easy” PL experience signings like Vestegaard and Skipp on over inflated prices and wages. And the lack of preparation post Fofana sale as bigger issues. We were let down with piss poor management there without doubt. 
 

and the fundamental issue this club has is despite this, there is still no plan or accountability. Until we fix that, we suffer. 

[Dan]

1 hour ago, Foxin_Mad said:

I dont really mind the club gambling a bit, it was just that they managed to assemble with the help of Rodgers, Rudkin and co one of the most spineless sides I have ever seen

There's gambling and there's Leicester City banking on making the Champions League. Despite getting very close in the previous two years that is irresponsible. Even today I think it wouldn't be prudent for say Tottenham or Manchester United to bank it on qualifying for the Champions League even with five places. In-fact I'd say the only three clubs who really can do this are Arsenal, Manchester City and Liverpool. Chelsea can probably get away with it and work around it if they miss out so add them in too.

 

The whole thing around that season doesn't compute. We budget to make the Champions League, abandon a model that had seen us rise to having a chance in the first place and then when we get nowhere near.... nothing changes. 

[Wink84]

3 hours ago, ajthefox said:

I just don't think Tielemans wanted to stay. There was at least one interview with him the summer before he left where the subject was raised with him and an offer was clearly on the table.

 

As Tommy said, comparing him to Thomas, Vestergaard and Hamza is apples and oranges, they're an entirely different calibre of player.

 

To be clear I'm not defending the club, I assume we could've done more one way or another but it's not like we were cheating out on wages at the time is it? Ultimately I just don't think Tielemans wanted to stay and it probably would've taken something silly to get him to.

No one can defend the club and allowing contracts to run out when we literally lost £200m worth of talent for free in one summer. Those in negotiations are unable to manage us correctly, they get deals done by offering silly wages. Winks and Coady prove that further. 

[Corky]

1 hour ago, Dan said:

I'd have been having these conversations way before a year - probably the summer of 2021 if he wasn't committing. We'd have also been able to sell him for loads if the clubs you were mentioning were interested, especially given what he'd just done in the FA Cup final.

 

It happens but it happens to us totally disproportionately to other clubs and it's a sign of the incompetence. That was the summer we also didn't sell anybody and unsurprisingly our entire 'model' went to pot.

 

If Leicester City were relying on making the Champions League then that is frankly utterly irresponsible, and also given we didn't get anywhere even close to it in 2021/22, where were the repercussions? We just plodded on and the rest is history.

We were relying on making the Champions League yet ignored for eight months the fact we were in a relegation battle and kept a manager on who was actively doing a ruinous job.

 

We were relying on Champions League football because nobody had a clue what was going on and needed the safety net.