Campaign: Sack The Board

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, honeybradger said:

At the time of the FA cup we were massively underperforming off of the pitch, it just took a couple season to fully catch up to us. The relegation wasnt a sudden occurrence of the club being run poorly, it was built towards for many years by the club's mismanagement.

 

For the owners the early indicators of the board not performing have been there for a while, high wage to turnover ratio (indication of improper planning in respect to contracts), players running down contracts (well run clubs regularly evaluate and talk to players on whether they want to leave), inability to sell players (usually means we initially overpaid for them or gave them too high of a wage), players getting frozen out by managers/not fitting the system (Vestergaard, Souttar, Soumare etc means players arent properly scouted with the club's current playstyle in mind).

 

All indicators point towards us sitting alongside the likes of Everton and Man United in terms of how well we are run. 

Well I'd disagree there and just say our decision-making was still hit and miss (as many clubs are). Yes there were issues, but as I say we lurch from good decision to bad decision. 

 

You mention the early indicator being high wage to turnover ratio, that was a decision taken by all of them, no one person can sign that off. And at the time, the sell an asset to cover the costs was working just fine. At the start of the FA cup winning season we were still sticking to that. We sold Chilwell and bought Fofana. 

 

The squad was littered with talent and it shouldn't have been an issue. Yeah there were still BIG issues afoot, like giving managers too much power and letting them install their own heads of recruitment. That ended up being a disaster, so did trying to back him and not sticking to what served us so well before and selling an asset. That summer is that tipping point moment IMO. Chuck in the UEFA rule changes about wage to turnover needing to be at a certain amount to ever hope to play in Eurorpe. 

 

Anyway, I'm not going through all this again. It's far more complex than people like to make out and a whole plethora of decisions over the span of years, plus some bad luck.

[Clever Fox]

22 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

Bravo! I've enjoyed reading this thoroughly....The worst post this millennium!

 

😂😂

So you think he can't decide how he runs the Club. He owns the it, What's so hard to understand. 

[Clever Fox]

13 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

If a club owner maliciously closed a club down, say out of spite, it's within the league's power to hand out their golden shade elsewhere. 

 

It's not entirely unprecedented. Rangers were effectively a phoenix club and Middlesbrough back in the 80s (I think Middlesbrough's official name is actually Middlesbrough 1984 or something) 

 

 

Now you're beginning to understand. If it were to happen and I'm not suggesting it would, Far from it. But we couldn't even use the name without buying it back from Top.

Same as Wimbildon and MK Dons.

[Fox92]

14 hours ago, Sly said:

I’m not so sure a Phoenix club would be admitted into the league though. 
 

To start with, where on earth is this club playing? Where are they training etc
 

Why should they be allowed into the league system, bypassing others that are grafting to get higher up the pyramid. 
 

 

 

13 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

If a club owner maliciously closed a club down, say out of spite, it's within the league's power to hand out their golden shade elsewhere. 

 

It's not entirely unprecedented. Rangers were effectively a phoenix club and Middlesbrough back in the 80s (I think Middlesbrough's official name is actually Middlesbrough 1984 or something) 

 

 

Darlington are a phoneix club.

 

Their owner wiped their debt and even built them a new ground before he drove them into administration (mainly because of the ground..).

[LCFCJohn]

25 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

I think it's a bit far fetched to attribute the FA cup win on Pearson at all, he'd been gone 6 years at that point!

 

We all love big Nige but come on 

I simply meant the players that were around. Not his direct input. So Morgan, Fuchs, Albrighton, Vardy so that’s what I mean by mixture of Pearson and title winners as well as later additions under Puel/Macia and then a couple that Rodgers had brought such as Perez and Fofana. 
 

So yeah was just in the context of when players that were part of the cup win were signed.

Edited 28 January by LCFCJohn

[Clever Fox]

1 hour ago, fox in the sox said:

I don’t think it is rewriting history. In the period up to 2010 we were nowhere near to winning the top flight as we hadn’t been for most of our history. We also only got close to winning the FA Cup in the 60’s. I agree that Vichai made mistakes early on but it was sorted out. This actually gives me more hope that Top can do the same.

I wasaround in the sixties and we should have won both but did'nt. We've had our best succes in recent times, albeit we're in a downbeat moment now.

 

I do believe Top will get it right even if it takes a few seasons. The idfference between him and Vichai is that when Vichai clicked his fingers things happened.

Top sadly doesn't have that power yet. He has to answer to the Board. We have no idea of what struggles he has in negotiating with the Board.

 

As I've said previously, None of these are Football people. They're are succesful business people in their own field. The Club was Viachai's and Tops decision.

Our current predicament is largely based in the Accident. Which I also forecast earlier.

 

My own guess is Top planing sole Ownership, but that will take time. While we soldier on by Committee.

[Lako42]

18 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

I do believe Top will get it right even if it takes a few seasons.

He's done absolutely nothing to suggest this is the case. 

 

7 years now...

[CUJimmy]

8 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

I wasaround in the sixties and we should have won both but did'nt. We've had our best succes in recent times, albeit we're in a downbeat moment now.

 

I do believe Top will get it right even if it takes a few seasons. The idfference between him and Vichai is that when Vichai clicked his fingers things happened.

Top sadly doesn't have that power yet. He has to answer to the Board. We have no idea of what struggles he has in negotiating with the Board.

 

As I've said previously, None of these are Football people. They're are succesful business people in their own field. The Club was Viachai's and Tops decision.

Our current predicament is largely based in the Accident. Which I also forecast earlier.

 

My own guess is Top planing sole Ownership, but that will take time. While we soldier on by Committee.

I am not sure what you mean by sole ownership?  Top already owns 55% and his family owns the rest.  I have no doubt that if he wanted to sell the club he could do so easily but who would we get instead?  Spending on the squad is unlikely to increase because this is limited by PSR not Top’s willingness to put his hand in his pocket.  We might complain about ticket prices now but what we pay is still pretty low compared with other clubs.

 

My biggest concern is not who owns the club, but who he turns to for football related advice and that person is Rudkin.

 

I have said it before and I don’t care if it sounds like a witch hunt but as Director of Football, whether we are recruiting managers, signing players or negotiating contracts it all comes back to him.  Replace him and we can turn the corner, it won’t be immediate because there is a lot to unwind but we could start heading in the right direction again.

 

[Clever Fox]

9 minutes ago, CUJimmy said:

I am not sure what you mean by sole ownership?  Top already owns 55% and his family owns the rest.  I have no doubt that if he wanted to sell the club he could do so easily but who would we get instead?  Spending on the squad is unlikely to increase because this is limited by PSR not Top’s willingness to put his hand in his pocket.  We might complain about ticket prices now but what we pay is still pretty low compared with other clubs.

 

My biggest concern is not who owns the club, but who he turns to for football related advice and that person is Rudkin.

 

I have said it before and I don’t care if it sounds like a witch hunt but as Director of Football, whether we are recruiting managers, signing players or negotiating contracts it all comes back to him.  Replace him and we can turn the corner, it won’t be immediate because there is a lot to unwind but we could start heading in the right direction again.

 

Sole Ownership is usually when an owner takes eiter 100% ownership or controlling ownership similar to Ratcliffe at Utd.

Your second point about PRS is correct. Then they critise him again because we didn't comply with PrS rules. And blame Top again for not spending enough because he's an easy target. 

 

The biggest mistake made has been the failure to appoint a proper DOF I'vesaid this many times. Get that right and we'll begin to move forward again.

But sadly the poor signings and decisions already made have to Wash through the Club before we can speed up our recovery. 

[Clever Fox]

27 minutes ago, Lako42 said:

He's done absolutely nothing to suggest this is the case. 

 

7 years now...

Not really true is it.  A Cup win, Covid, And the Accident should not be dismissed. Supported Rogers with  200 million of spending, It's just a pity he wasted most of it.

Relegation was down to Rogers also not Top. Your're conveniently forgetting that.

 

He brought in Enzo who is a top Coach and got us promoted again.  That's Football.

 

He was never convinced about Cooper himself. 

 

Where I do agree he's made a mistake is in keeping Rudkin in the DOF role as he's simply not good enough. The consequence of that is the Poor signings which has us struggling now .

Although you haveto make allowance for unforseen long term injuries.

[Clever Fox]

5 hours ago, Lako42 said:

Jesus H Christ

Of course that's not likely to happen. Though the point is the same legally he could do it if he wanted to.

 

At the end of the day he's looking for the same thing as the rest of us. It's just sometimes it takes a little longer.    

[urban fox]

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of decisions made, appointments etc  etc. those that think the chair or board of directors have any responsibility towards the fans knows nothing about company law. The only responsibility they have is to the shareholders, and to a lesser extent, in the case of a football club, to the rules of whatever league/competition they compete in. 

This is simply a hard fact like it or not. Morally, it may be wrong in terms of history and culture etc but that's life.

People can protest and cry about it all they like but ultimately it makes no difference.

If you feel that strongly, the only way to really bring about change is to buy enough shares to entitle a meaningful vote at the agm etc. Football clubs ARE businesses, and companies, not some sort of heritage charity run by groups of well meaning volunteers.

If you don't like the product, don't buy it. There are plenty of others that will.

[LCFCJohn]

1 hour ago, Clever Fox said:

Not really true is it.  A Cup win, Covid, And the Accident should not be dismissed. Supported Rogers with  200 million of spending, It's just a pity he wasted most of it.

Relegation was down to Rogers also not Top. Your're conveniently forgetting that.

 

He brought in Enzo who is a top Coach and got us promoted again.  That's Football.

 

He was never convinced about Cooper himself. 

 

Where I do agree he's made a mistake is in keeping Rudkin in the DOF role as he's simply not good enough. The consequence of that is the Poor signings which has us struggling now .

Although you haveto make allowance for unforseen long term injuries.

It’s a pretty major issue though, the Rudkin thing. It feeds into so many other issues which you highlight. 
 

He needs to get a handle on it. The situation is not unrecoverable if he does but there are no signs of it happening.

 

The other issue I have personally is just that I feel he has created a poor culture that comes from the top. The entitlement and softness of the squads we are putting together nowadays. Maybe that could be resolved though a fresh approach to the footballing side. 
 

And his contempt towards the fanbase when he does get criticised.

[Clever Fox]

2 hours ago, urban fox said:

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of decisions made, appointments etc  etc. those that think the chair or board of directors have any responsibility towards the fans knows nothing about company law. The only responsibility they have is to the shareholders, and to a lesser extent, in the case of a football club, to the rules of whatever league/competition they compete in. 

This is simply a hard fact like it or not. Morally, it may be wrong in terms of history and culture etc but that's life.

People can protest and cry about it all they like but ultimately it makes no difference.

If you feel that strongly, the only way to really bring about change is to buy enough shares to entitle a meaningful vote at the agm etc. Football clubs ARE businesses, and companies, not some sort of heritage charity run by groups of well meaning volunteers.

If you don't like the product, don't buy it. There are plenty of others that will.

This is exactly the point I was making albeit not as elequently as you. I'm a bit more blunt speaking. 

I was just pointing out the extremes of what could happen. I don't believe any of it will.

 

The Fans had their chance when we nearly went bust and Lineker and Heskey saved us. While the Fans, me included sat ideally bye with our hands protecting our money.

 

Now they have the audacity to tell the Owners who have only ever tried to do right by the Club. How to run the Club.

 

The good times will come again, I'm sure of it.

 

 

Edited 28 January by Clever Fox
typo

[honeybradger]

4 hours ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

To me this view feels like setting a narrative to suit an underlying agenda - it’s very one sided, there’s no balance or credit given where due.

 

It also makes me wonder what you actually want from a new board and/or owner.

 

Take the high wage to turnover ratio you criticise - it’s something I’ve had a concern about for a long time, but there is a stark reality to this in that;

 

• The clubs revenue streams are weak compared to the competition it’s trying to compete with.

 

• One way to increase revenue streams long term would be through greater on pitch performance - but invariably that requires greater spending on transfer fees and player wages.

 

• Average transfer fees and player wages across the Premier League have clearly continued to scale upwards at pace - making it harder for those at lower income levels to compete.

 

• The PSR limit has not moved at all since its inception despite the clear is a club manager outlay - again, making it harder for a club like ours to compete at the top end.

 

So, given you voice this as an area of concern - is it your view the board should be more prudent in the transfer market and pay less in transfer fees and wages to bring the wages to turnover % into a more comfortable range - at the potential cost of on pitch performance? 
 

Are you looking for a more prudent approach - which in turn might mean we can then only ever compete at a top end Championship level / bottom end Premier League level except for the odd season? 
 

What EXACTLY is it you are looking for from new ownership given all the criticisms you’ve voiced here? 
 

Finally, one thing I think you fail to provide credit towards this ownership group for is that the success achieved over their time spanned across two largely different player groups.

 

Of course you had the title winners, where I’d say we lucked out on some unbelievable signings - the likes you get one in tens years - and we had 3 of them in one grouping (Mahrez, Vardy and Kante).

 

But then if you look at the FA Cup winning team and squad - that was a much evolved and younger squad.

 

There’s also signs that the club might be in the process of bringing together another formidable squad grouping - and that if the club sticks together and survives in the Premier League this season, with the right additions it could positive build on that next year.

 

So again, it needs to be asked - if you want the board out and presumably that means them out ASAP.

 

Are you willing to accept the potential negative consequences that a period of upheaval and uncertainty would bring with it, such as a hold on transfer spending and contract renewals until a takeover was formalised? 

 

There a numerous other clubs across Europe's top leagues outside of the PL that maintainm far better squads than ours  whilst spending less on transfers/wages. 

 

Yes money helps but an abundance of it is also a hindrance. Where other clubs need to be precious with their spending we can throw £10mil on someone like Okoli in the summer and already be trying to shift him in January. 

 

The way you phrased it seems that you believe there are only 2 approaches:

 

1. Throw around money and see what sticks - the club's approach

 

2. Buy championship level players for cheap.

 

There is a 3rd option where we take a measured approach to transfers and do due diligence before bringing them in. Where we still buy players in the £10mil-£25mil bracket like we spent on Okoli and Skipp but actually buy good quality players that fit the system that we want to play instead. 

 

https://analyticsfc.co.uk/blog/2024/12/09/transfer-gurus-royale-union-saint-gilloises-chris-oloughlin/

Feel free to read this article. This is the kind of club we need to be looking towards. Despite their recent success relative to their income they are still committed to spending within their means (bottom 5 in the Belgian League) and still manage to regularly unearth quality players for low transfer fees.

[Clever Fox]

58 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

It’s a pretty major issue though, the Rudkin thing. It feeds into so many other issues which you highlight. 
 

He needs to get a handle on it. The situation is not unrecoverable if he does but there are no signs of it happening.

 

The other issue I have personally is just that I feel he has created a poor culture that comes from the top. The entitlement and softness of the squads we are putting together nowadays. Maybe that could be resolved though a fresh approach to the footballing side. 
 

And his contempt towards the fanbase when he does get criticised.

I totally agree, But again weare not privy to anything, He could be on a 5 year Contract and a change will happen then. We just don't know.

 

The situation is recoverable but we have to be proactive in getting players out first otherwise we have to work down their Contracts. Which is not ideal when we need new faces.

 

You can't blame the players for taking what they can get. The problem is assessing their worth to the Club and setting Caps. If they don't like it let them go.

 

In my experience in life and I've been around a long time. When you attack authority you only get their back up.

 

Wouldn't it be better for Fans to maybe write to him at the Club and express their concern in the direction the Club is going.  That way he might just meet them halfway or explain the difficulties. 

Or put out a statement to ease the fears of many. Like he done about the Training ground development and the Stadium expansion.

[MattFox]

4 hours ago, Clever Fox said:

I wasaround in the sixties and we should have won both but did'nt. We've had our best succes in recent times, albeit we're in a downbeat moment now.

 

I do believe Top will get it right even if it takes a few seasons. The idfference between him and Vichai is that when Vichai clicked his fingers things happened.

Top sadly doesn't have that power yet. He has to answer to the Board. We have no idea of what struggles he has in negotiating with the Board.

 

As I've said previously, None of these are Football people. They're are succesful business people in their own field. The Club was Viachai's and Tops decision.

Our current predicament is largely based in the Accident. Which I also forecast earlier.

 

My own guess is Top planing sole Ownership, but that will take time. While we soldier on by Committee.

Top doesn’t answer to Rudkin and Whelan is sidelined

If you believe Companies House top already has sole ownership since 2018

 

[Clever Fox]

1 minute ago, MattFox said:

Top doesn’t answer to Rudkin and Whelan is sidelined

If you believe Companies House top already has sole ownership since 2018

 

Whelan was never involved with the day to day running of the Football Club. She's CEO of the whole kp operations and still spends several days week in Thailand.

 

That's where you get the answers Companies house. However, having 55% of the Shares only means that he's majority shareholder. It does not infer sole ownership. 

Unless it's by agreement with the other Board Members. For instance his Mum could say you look after my shareholding asshe takes a back seat.

 

I reality , He's still answerable to the Board. Which can be troublesome but not always.  As I've said already I think sole Ownership is what he's working towards but maybe he's not ready or does'nt have the capitol to do so presently to buy up the the shares. Or he does'nt want to cause unrest given that they are the same people he has to work with running KP.

 

Only time will tell.

[Mickyblueeyes]

5 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

Whelan was never involved with the day to day running of the Football Club. She's CEO of the whole kp operations and still spends several days week in Thailand.

 

That's where you get the answers Companies house. However, having 55% of the Shares only means that he's majority shareholder. It does not infer sole ownership. 

Unless it's by agreement with the other Board Members. For instance his Mum could say you look after my shareholding asshe takes a back seat.

 

I reality , He's still answerable to the Board. Which can be troublesome but not always.  As I've said already I think sole Ownership is what he's working towards but maybe he's not ready or does'nt have the capitol to do so presently to buy up the the shares. Or he does'nt want to cause unrest given that they are the same people he has to work with running KP.

 

Only time will tell.

There are 2 problems with this - a CEO is responsible for the day to day running of the enterprise. She is not President of KP. She is CEO of LCFC. And if she is not capable for whatever to do the job (evident from the asset dropping significantly in value) we need a proper, fit for purpose CEO. I'm sorry but these are not defences for the indept performance of senior members of LCFC who are benefiting from LCFC funds. 

 

All you are telling is that pressure absolutely needs to be applied in order for the business to be treated like the serious entity it is. 

[Clever Fox]

15 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

There are 2 problems with this - a CEO is responsible for the day to day running of the enterprise. She is not President of KP. She is CEO of LCFC. And if she is not capable for whatever to do the job (evident from the asset dropping significantly in value) we need a proper, fit for purpose CEO. I'm sorry but these are not defences for the indept performance of senior members of LCFC who are benefiting from LCFC funds. 

 

All you are telling is that pressure absolutely needs to be applied in order for the business to be treated like the serious entity it is. 

I never said she was president. I said she was CEO.  While she's highly respected in industry, She was saddled with a job without the Football backround.

The only deop in value is on the Player recruitment , Something he has little or nothing to do with.

 

I doubt anyone is taking it for granted but the Family have had other major issues to contend with. Maybe Football is just not top of their agenda right now. 

[Mickyblueeyes]

47 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

I never said she was president. I said she was CEO.  While she's highly respected in industry, She was saddled with a job without the Football backround.

The only deop in value is on the Player recruitment , Something he has little or nothing to do with.

 

I doubt anyone is taking it for granted but the Family have had other major issues to contend with. Maybe Football is just not top of their agenda right now. 

Again, you’re not helping Whelan’s argument here. A ceo who is not able to understand the fundamental product of the business they head for 14 years is incompetent and not fit for purpose. Again, another argument in favour to oust them

[Clever Fox]

Good luck with that.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

2 hours ago, honeybradger said:

 

https://analyticsfc.co.uk/blog/2024/12/09/transfer-gurus-royale-union-saint-gilloises-chris-oloughlin/

Feel free to read this article. This is the kind of club we need to be looking towards. Despite their recent success relative to their income they are still committed to spending within their means (bottom 5 in the Belgian League) and still manage to regularly unearth quality players for low transfer fees.

With respect to Union the financial gaps and player quality differential within the Belgian leagues will be somewhat different and easier to compete with than the Premier League.

 

As a general model fine, but I don’t really see that they’re doing anything wildly different to the approach we have had with transfers on the whole - barr the odd older, immediate need signings that also have to be made for leagues as competitive as the Premier League and Championship.

 

For every dudd signing that can be pointed at over the past few years, you can point to a quality one - but that’s the natures of transfers, some work, others don’t… and in some cases some take longer to prove their worth (Vestegaard, Soumare?).

 

 

I get it that because of the PSR issues and relegation that fans have taken the opinion the club is badly run; but we’re not the only club to have troubles with PSR, poor performance and indeed relegation and you could argue the fact we were running so close to PSR limits was an indication of how ambitious we were trying to be at a time it was right to take a risk - and that had things on the margins gone differently (Champions League qualification) the overall story might have been very different.

 

It’s also important to remember that when you operate a transfer policy of finding rough jems and trying to make them into the finished article, there will be fallow years, as even the article you referenced points out for Union;
 

 

“The fact that Union have been able to sustain such a high level of success for three seasons is mightily impressive, but it is only natural that they face some (at least temporary) dropoffs given their budget and approach…

 

…the fact that Union are ninth in the Pro League at the time of writing is neither a reflection of a drop in their scouting or recruitment nor an indictment of their approach. Instead, it is simply a natural part of their model which they will inevitably have to come across at some point.”

 

So there’s certainly an argument that some fan’s aren’t accepting the rough that comes with the smooth and that football, transfers and finance at the Premier League level is far from easy, as the likes of clubs Manchester United, Chelsea, Everton, Spurs, Leeds and West Ham have shown us.

 

And given I’ve referenced United and Chelsea - they also show a change of ownership is no guarantee to either success or indeed a better situation for fans overall when it comes to Ineos - and be clear, if new owners took over the club, they could be doing it on a purely profit motive, there’s no guarantee it comes with the ‘culture shift’ you’re looking for.

Edited 28 January by DJ Barry Hammond

[honeybradger]

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

With respect to Union the financial gaps and player quality differential within the Belgian leagues will be somewhat different and easier to compete with than the Premier League.

They have done better in Europa League in recent years than we did in our stints. The fact that they probably have a similar or better level of squad to ours whilst spending at maximum £6-7mil pounds on players, majority under £1mil, shows the different classes in management.

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

As a general model fine, but I don’t really see that they’re doing anything wildly different to the approach we have had with transfers on the whole - barr the odd older, immediate need signings that also have to be made for leagues as competitive as the Premier League and Championship.

As above our transfer strategies are night and day. They bring Denis Undav in on a free from the 3rd tier of the German League, we spend £7mil on Tom Cannon, they buy Victor Boniface for £6mil, we buy Jordan Ayew for £5mil.

 

Again look at their transfer fees and then internalise the fact that they likely beat us in a head to head game. Then seriously consider that idea before you say that we are run at an even vaguely similar level.

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

For every dudd signing that can be pointed at over the past few years, you can point to a quality one - but that’s the natures of transfers, some work, others don’t… and in some cases some take longer to prove their worth (Vestegaard, Soumare?).

I'm not going to go through every transfer over the past few years but what you've said is blatantly wrong. We have gotten far more transfers wrong in recent years than we have gotten right. The only PL level players we've signed permanently since the Fofana signing being El Khannous, Hermansen and Fatawu is criminal (maybe Soumare but that's a push).

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

 

I get it that because of the PSR issues and relegation that fans have taken the opinion the club is badly run; but we’re not the only club to have troubles with PSR, poor performance and indeed relegation and you could argue the fact we were running so close to PSR limits was an indication of how ambitious we were trying to be at a time it was right to take a risk - and that had things on the margins gone differently (Champions League qualification) the overall story might have been very different.

We signed Ryan Bennett on loan to complete our champions league push. We signed Soumare to cover both Ndidi and Tielemans despite being a completely different profile of player to either of them. We signed Wout Faes for £15mil. We signed Vestergaard for £15mil. We signed Souttar for £15mil and never played him. We signed Kristiansen for £15mil. We signed Praet for £20mil. We signed Ryan Bertrand. We renewed Danny Ward's contract and went into a PL season with him as a starter. We let Tielemans run down his contract. We had Soyuncu in the reserves running down his contract. It wasnt ambition, it was incompetence, pure pig headed incompetence that's going to be used as an example for years of how to not run a football club.

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

It’s also important to remember that when you operate a transfer policy of finding rough jems and trying to make them into the finished article, there will be fallow years, as even the article you referenced points out for Union;
 

 

“The fact that Union have been able to sustain such a high level of success for three seasons is mightily impressive, but it is only natural that they face some (at least temporary) dropoffs given their budget and approach…

 

…the fact that Union are ninth in the Pro League at the time of writing is neither a reflection of a drop in their scouting or recruitment nor an indictment of their approach. Instead, it is simply a natural part of their model which they will inevitably have to come across at some point.”

They are 3rd in the Belgian League despite being 5th from bottom in expenditure in that league. Yes they will drop off at some point (relative to the heights they have reached since their new owners took over) but because they have such a clear strategy to transfers and squad building they wont drop very far. Us on the other hand could genuinely be in league one in the next few seasons and I wouldn't be surprised.

1 hour ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

So there’s certainly an argument that some fan’s aren’t accepting the rough that comes with the smooth and that football, transfers and finance at the Premier League level is far from easy, as the likes of clubs Manchester United, Chelsea, Everton, Spurs, Leeds and West Ham have shown us.

 

And given I’ve referenced United and Chelsea - they also show a change of ownership is no guarantee to either success or indeed a better situation for fans overall when it comes to Ineos - and be clear, if new owners took over the club, they could be doing it on a purely profit motive, there’s no guarantee it comes with the ‘culture shift’ you’re looking for.

All I'm asking for is to get an actual Sporting Director in place of John Rudkin. Someone who actually understands football, who knows what contracts players are worth, what transfer fees they are worth, what attributes we need in the players we are bring in etc.

Edited 28 January by honeybradger

[DJ Barry Hammond]

16 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

All I'm asking for is to get an actual Sporting Director in place of John Rudkin. Someone who actually understands football, who knows what contracts players are worth, what transfer fees they are worth, what attributes we need in the players we are bring in etc.

 

That’s not sack the board then I guess, it’s Rudkin out.

 

But I would ponder this.

 

Vichai was clearly no mug and not one for sentiment - he was a proper businessman that wouldn’t put up with incompetence at the highest level in his businesses.

 

So he must have seen something in Rudkin, some positive qualities, that led him to not only keeping him on throughout his time, but extending his remit to his horse racing / polo interests.

 

Anyway - a lot of the noise around this is pointless at this point in time anyway.

 

1.) It would be insane to sack your DOF during a transfer window 

 

and

 

2.) Any potential buyer of the club hoping to take control would need very deep pockets to buy out Top / King Power given the money they’ve invested / debt to equity conversions they hold… and

 

3.) If there are interested parties (I’ve not heard of any) they would no doubt wait until the end of the season to see where we finish in the league - because that would be a key valuation basis for the club.

 

That of course doesn’t stop fans from viewing their opinion on this matter at games, but they may want to take a queue from the Spurs game and reflect how the negative atmosphere can impact a sides performance.