A Call for Change: A Footballing Reset at Leicester City Football Club

[SemperEadem]

20 minutes ago, Trekerz said:

@Union FS any comments on this yet? I know you don't want to sever your relationship with the club but that shouldn't stop you as a group getting involved due to their threats. 

Yeah briefly internally and im sure there will be more.

Only speaking as me here I would be wanting to find out more first.
Certainly before going out and attaching the group with something, we like everyone else know little plan right now.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Just now, SemperEadem said:

Yeah briefly internally and im sure there will be more.

Only speaking as me here I would be wanting to find out more first.
Certainly before going out and attaching the group with something, we like everyone else know little plan right now.

Plus the organiser openly said they didn't want supporters groups involved.

[LFEFox23]

What's the message or banners going to say?

Edited 27 January by LFEFox23

[ClaphamFox]

30 minutes ago, Danizen said:

I agree with the protest but I can see this kicking off a bit if we get decent results in the next two games.

 

The will to protest won't be there for most fans in the context of good results. It would also allow the media to push the 'entitled Leicester fans' narrative if we're outside the relegation zone. Fans of other clubs and a large amount of our fans will lap it up. 

 

Could be reminiscent of 14/15 when our fans were having fist fights in the stands.

Yep. If we get a decent result against Everton, the recent groundswell of anger at the club will be replaced by growing optimism that we can survive and the will to protest will dissipate significantly. In fact, any protest will likely be regarded with hostility by those who see it as a threat to the team's survival prospects. That could get nasty.

 

It's mad that a couple of results (assuming we even get one at Everton) could take the heat off the club to that extent, but that's the reality.

Edited 27 January by ClaphamFox

[SemperEadem]

Yeah a win at Everton will see the numbers for this tank id imagine.

[RoboFox]

1 hour ago, Trekerz said:

@Union FS any comments on this yet? I know you don't want to sever your relationship with the club but that shouldn't stop you as a group getting involved due to their threats. 

Not at all surprising that they've stayed quiet on this IMO. 

 

They've now got their feet under the table and we all know what the club are like. They get wind of any supporters group backing something like this then all of a sudden requests from the groups start being declined. 

[Trekerz]

1 minute ago, RoboFox said:

Not at all surprising that they've stayed quiet on this IMO. 

 

They've now got their feet under the table and we all know what the club are like. They get wind of any supporters group backing something like this then all of a sudden requests from the groups start being declined. 

I get that but what does that mean then? No supporter groups can ever call out the club without the fear of club "punishing" them. IMO by doing that, just gives the club even more power which they definitely shouldn't have. (Not saying UFS don't call the club out btw, have seen them do it numerous times)

[Sly]

For UFS, I guess it’s about choosing your battles.

 

I’m guessing being attached to a protest to oust the board, isn’t one they particularly want to be associated with. 
 

Whilst they have engagement within the club, they can be a growing voice for the fans as they now have dialect. 
 

Any good business listens to its business and acts upon feedback. UFS could / would be a major channel for that if done correctly.

 

If the club gets wind of anyone in the  Reset group, I’d imagine they will be blacklisted and banned given the chance . 

[Silebyfox_89]

17 hours ago, LFEFox23 said:

What's the message or banners going to say?

"We want change!!!" Or "Change the board!!!"

 

Can't just go with Rudkin out otherwise it's a witch hunt.

[iancognito]

34 minutes ago, Silebyfox_89 said:

"We want change!!!" Or "Change the board!!!"

 

Can't just go with Rudkin out otherwise it's a witch hunt.

Too many KPFC fans get hurt by the board phrase. They assume it's an attack on the owner and some of our fans cannot remember a time before Thailand anymore.

Rudkin is a focal point, the adviser to Top on so many issues and the guy ultimately responsible for contracts and recruitment. The financial directors, "Chief counsel" and the other faceless 5 are even more anonymous than Jonny boy.

[Lako42]

19 hours ago, SemperEadem said:

Yeah a win at Everton will see the numbers for this tank id imagine.

And that will be the end for me. 

 

If we can't actually see the bigger picture as a fan base on this then it's finished and I won't lose any more of my life trying. 

[CosbehFox]

20 hours ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Plus the organiser openly said they didn't want supporters groups involved.

Personally opinion is that attaching supporters groups to it will unfortunately for some act as a  reason to bash it. 
 

Plenty out there what can’t wait to bash Union FS 

[Nolucklcfc]

Has there been any more detail on this yet? 

[alanf0x]

It’s simple…we want Rudkin out, say we want Rudkin out

[Ricey]

I think “board” is suitably vague. Top is seen as the owner, not the board.
 

If we just go after Rudkin then it risks becoming abusive and a witch hunt. Plus an upturn in recent results takes the heat off the on-pitch anger, for now.

 

Besides, if we only put pressure on Rudkin the best that will happen is that he’ll get a job title change and it won’t really make a difference. He’ll still be Top’s right hand man, making all the decisions.

 

We can’t ignore the shambles off the pitch. The club has treated the fans with total distain in regards to pricing, fees, ticketing, safe standing, supporter groups, FAB etc etc. They won’t communicate, unless when it is to defend one of those decisions or double down on how above board the gambling crypto sponsor is.

 

Take the footballing side away from it and we still have every right to be angry. We have to reflect that and we have to heard. Focussing only on Rudkin doesn’t achieve that.

[Skidmark]

Good on UFS waiting on further information.

 

They've been the most successful force in implementing change inside the ground.

 

It's sensible. I'd encourage members to make their own mind up/join. Not directly affiliate with the project.

[DezFox]

We will get a result against Everton and it will fizzle out. Real shame. We will still get relegated and it won’t be Rudkins fault again. This is the Leicester way.
 

This sounds mental but beating spurs could actually have a negative impact on the club long term. The fact we are trying to be buy a crocked AOC shows we have learnt nothing and still ran by the same useless, slow, backwards leadership around in a structure that has more internal barriers than anything else. Joke 

[1972 Fox]

18 minutes ago, DezFox said:

The fact we are trying to be buy a crocked AOC

When did this become fact?

 

Back on topic, I fully agree with this call for change protest.

[DezFox]

21 minutes ago, 1972 Fox said:

When did this become fact?

 

Back on topic, I fully agree with this call for change protest.

Haha fair. It’s defo not fact, I hope not anyway. 

[Tommy G]

23 hours ago, RoboFox said:

Not at all surprising that they've stayed quiet on this IMO. 

 

They've now got their feet under the table and we all know what the club are like. They get wind of any supporters group backing something like this then all of a sudden requests from the groups start being declined. 

Sort of agree but in life you've got to put your money where your mouth is? 

 

Feet under the table, what kind of tangible benefits are they getting - the authorisation to do the odd tifo, there aren't any plans to roll out safe standing etc. 

 

I think the backing by a supporters group could actually elevate any protest - it's where the large chunk of the anti board chants have come from so not backing it would look a bit odd. 

 

Happy to be corrected. 

[RYM]

21 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Sort of agree but in life you've got to put your money where your mouth is? 

 

Feet under the table, what kind of tangible benefits are they getting - the authorisation to do the odd tifo, there aren't any plans to roll out safe standing etc. 

 

I think the backing by a supporters group could actually elevate any protest - it's where the large chunk of the anti board chants have come from so not backing it would look a bit odd. 

 

Happy to be corrected. 

As a club they are actively taking the "Heavy hands, empty stands" approach to a different level. The club spend half their time trolling social media, message boards etc looking for trouble. When they inevitably find it they attack and start the threats. There is an argument that it needs the groups to chuck a few grenades (not literally) because at the end of the day as you say, what do the groups get back? Very little on their own terms it seems. The worst that can happen is the club don't talk to them, but I'd argue they don't listen to the groups anyway (Apart from the groups that they can get award nominations for).

 

Tony is his Ivory Tower does not care about anything but his CV, the club will never sit up and say "maybe we have got it wrong", he will continue to telephone groups asking for reasoning but as I mentioned before, the club outgrew his type many moons ago. Get them all out.

 

 

[CosbehFox]

I think many underestimate how much some folk dislike those behind Union FS. It’s very petty and sad but I spent the other week arguing with someone about it. Some think wrongly that the toxicity is solely down to them and them alone. 

[Tommy G]

1 hour ago, RYM said:

As a club they are actively taking the "Heavy hands, empty stands" approach to a different level. The club spend half their time trolling social media, message boards etc looking for trouble. When they inevitably find it they attack and start the threats. There is an argument that it needs the groups to chuck a few grenades (not literally) because at the end of the day as you say, what do the groups get back? Very little on their own terms it seems. The worst that can happen is the club don't talk to them, but I'd argue they don't listen to the groups anyway (Apart from the groups that they can get award nominations for).

 

Tony is his Ivory Tower does not care about anything but his CV, the club will never sit up and say "maybe we have got it wrong", he will continue to telephone groups asking for reasoning but as I mentioned before, the club outgrew his type many moons ago. Get them all out.

 

 

Yeh so that kind of backs up my point why not just back the protest and get involved? Nothing is at stake really. 

 

If there is more of a collective protesting against the clubs it gets heard - if supporter groups distance themselves from it then they are whinging about the club (like we all do) but then don't back it up with action. 

[Tommy G]

22 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

I think many underestimate how much some folk dislike those behind Union FS. It’s very petty and sad but I spent the other week arguing with someone about it. Some think wrongly that the toxicity is solely down to them and them alone. 

Well thats just childish as everyone wants what is best for the club, shouldn't of given him the time of day. FWIW I really think UFS should be backing this protest and IMO would look worse if they didn't rather than did. 

[KrefelderFox666]

8 hours ago, Tommy G said:

Well thats just childish as everyone wants what is best for the club, shouldn't of given him the time of day. FWIW I really think UFS should be backing this protest and IMO would look worse if they didn't rather than did. 

To be fair there are multiple points to consider for this.

 

1. It's great to see others take a lead/initiative on this sort of thing and as a group, we don't feel it's right to barge in and take over.

2. Following on from point 1, the leader(s) of this also wouldn't want groups to get too involved.

3. As a group, we want to make sure this has value which meant biding our time a little bit to see how it evolves.

 

Bottom line, I do think the group (or at least majority of members) will support this but not front and centre. We will be present to join in but not steal anyone's thunder. The closer we get, the more we will talk internally about any plans.