Club Statement

[SemperEadem]

BSLB had a grown up balanced discussion. 
The Monday night pod on RL from the off had a guest headmastering talking about hate crimes and the police.

 

I know which was more useful.

[bmt]

On 10/11/2025 at 16:37, AKCJ said:

It was sung by a crowd of about 20 people around 10 minutes prior to kick off in the concourse and pretty much everyone else said "bloody hell, bit much lads". Clearly a group of pissed up idiots because they were all doing that ****ing daft jumping up and down trying to slosh as much carling down each other as they could while each of them had their phone out to record it. The type of kids who talk about "scenes" and "limbs" when describing football. I didn't hear it being sung in the stands.

 

Yes the lyrics, on paper, are absolutely abhorrent. However, there isn't any genuine threat to Rudkin. This wasn't exactly sung by a baying mob with pitchforks and torches outside of his house.

 

This was a group of young adults who got carried away. Unfortunately, it's the only time King Power Football Club have ever acknowledged that fans are frustrated yet they've not acknowledged the thousands of Leicester fans chanting "Sack the board" or "We want Rudkin Out" or "We don't care about Rudkin, he don't care about me".

 

All this has done is given the happy clapping mob further reason to avoid pushing the club for change. Their silence (coupled with King Power's silence) is the reasons that tensions and frustrations have boiled over to this point. 

 

Norwich fans have been penning their board in the ground. They literally haven't been letting their directors leave Carrow Road after home games yet we're supposed to have been the ones crossing the line because some (heavy emphasis on some) Leicester fans sang a pretty revolting song.

 

It's exactly the same situation here as to what happened at Manchester United (even the song is the same). Nothing changes when you protest 'fairly' so why bother? Why not turn the heat up on the board? This is the first time we've heard them interact with fans and they still avoided the core issue. Now we've got the same old Happy Clappers trying to tarnish everyone that wants Rudkin and AIyawatt to leave with the same brush as the idiots that sang this song.

 

 

To be fair I think this is really important context. From just looking at the words of the song I can get why people would fall so strongly on one side. It's also a lame song. All that being said, small numbers of idiots always exist at the football.

 

I do completely agree on the statement, also 'a bit much' and continually out of touch. The radio silence until this point has been pathetic, so its understandable how frustrations have boiled over, even though this particular song is too far.

 

Final point - if Rudkin genuinely thinks its a threat to him and his family, surely he quits? How can you listen to the criticism day in day out and do nothing, even when you perceive it to be a hate crime? I understand not wanting to bow down to unfair pressure but there is now a consistent point against them that you would think they would listen to.

 

Final point - considering all the frustrations and the fact for most of the game we were bad, the celebrations at the end were also a joke. Most of the away end's issues melted away, and half the crowd lorded it over the poor Norwich fans who are in a worse position than us in ever way. Pathetic, fickle behavior. We need to keep the pressure up on KP.

[Jackubu]

54 minutes ago, SemperEadem said:

BSLB had a grown up balanced discussion. 
The Monday night pod on RL from the off had a guest headmastering talking about hate crimes and the police.

 

I know which was more useful.

Shows how out of touch he is with the average fan. Dangerous that he chairs the fan experience portion of the FCC with other fans 

[SemperEadem]

4 minutes ago, Jackubu said:

Shows how out of touch he is with the average fan. Dangerous that he chairs the fan experience portion of the FCC with other fans 

Yes the ‘LCFC culture’ part of the FAB. It has been noticed on the club notes how much of the club culture discussion appears to be on topics like ID ticket collection, telephone numbers to report fans, LCFC stewards at away games etc.
 

Not seeing much on club history, grassroots, away travel, supporter nights. 
Things that in my book promote LCFC culture.

[foxfanazer]

However despicable the chants where from a few coked up chavs, it's interesting that that's what has brought them out of their hole. Not the two relegations in three years, or the financial issues and threats of point deductions, or the gambling companies plastered on our shirts.

 

I don't advocate violence, racism, homophobia etc but I also have no sympathy whatsoever for these charlatans

[UniFox21]

1 hour ago, SemperEadem said:

BSLB had a grown up balanced discussion. 
The Monday night pod on RL from the off had a guest headmastering talking about hate crimes and the police.

 

I know which was more useful.

Not a huge shock to hear the RL approach given it is the BBC.

 

BSLB discussion was significantly more adult, important to have the conversation on the hate connotations on what was said given the age we're in, but also the wider context.

 

Enjoyed the small addition that the club have never released anything on the numerous hate/spitting towards the UFS lads/Tifo that's generally caught on film by the hundreds of police etc.  

[Loxm]

11 hours ago, Foxes Trust Reform said:

Disappointing to hear Graeme Smith on the When You're Smiling podcast going down the hate crime and police involvement route in response to this. Feels a bit out of touch.

 

Is this really what the fan base want from the Fan Engagement Framework and individuals on the Fan Advisory Board that are there to represent them?

 

Such a shame the Trust signed up to this nonsense and have Ian Bason as their representative playing a part in it...

Oh come on mate haha, he was just saying the chants crossed a line and that they were extreme enough that, if the police got involved, it would probably meet a threshold. Why is it that anyone who condemns those chants instantly gets treated online like they’re defending Rudkin and Top? There’s clearly a middle ground between not wishing death on someone and thinking the club are doing a great job.

[CosbehFox]

Amongst the madness of all this, I thought Challsy contribution on BSLB was excellent and its that nuanced discussion of everything which is vital in any unifying strands of the fanbase. We have to start looking at a proper forum in exchange of opinions which is outside that of the clubs constrains. It needs to be adult, sensible and nuanced. Without the need for pile on's and the social media waffle. 

 

It's a credit to the BSLB boys given they are not any major media organisation that they gave the discussion space to actually go into subtle detail. 

 

As a fanbase, we need to start tabling solutions to how we make the problems work. There are lots of moans and disagreements but very little, where do we go from here solutions. The fans can manage some of that - it doesn't need the club to be those that action it. 

[SafewayFox]

33 minutes ago, Loxm said:

Oh come on mate haha, he was just saying the chants crossed a line and that they were extreme enough that, if the police got involved, it would probably meet a threshold. Why is it that anyone who condemns those chants instantly gets treated online like they’re defending Rudkin and Top? There’s clearly a middle ground between not wishing death on someone and thinking the club are doing a great job.

Rightly or wrongly, would it though?

 

The Rudkin chant was a Glazer one and a quick Google search suggests that there’s zero evidence/precedent other wise.

 

You can think that the chant was hideous, stress that fact and move on.

 

Adding hate crime comments to me, takes away any focus/accountability from the dubious club statement.

[VLC86]

15 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Amongst the madness of all this, I thought Challsy contribution on BSLB was excellent and its that nuanced discussion of everything which is vital in any unifying strands of the fanbase. We have to start looking at a proper forum in exchange of opinions which is outside that of the clubs constrains. It needs to be adult, sensible and nuanced. Without the need for pile on's and the social media waffle. 

 

It's a credit to the BSLB boys given they are not any major media organisation that they gave the discussion space to actually go into subtle detail. 

 

As a fanbase, we need to start tabling solutions to how we make the problems work. There are lots of moans and disagreements but very little, where do we go from here solutions. The fans can manage some of that - it doesn't need the club to be those that action it. 

Fair point on self policing. I think a lot of very respectable and balanced posters have probably shied away from saying too much in this thread for fear of a pile on one way or the other and some are likely to continue to do that.

[Loxm]

7 minutes ago, SafewayFox said:

Rightly or wrongly, would it though?

 

The Rudkin chant was a Glazer one and a quick Google search suggests that there’s zero evidence/precedent other wise.

 

You can think that the chant was hideous, stress that fact and move on.

 

Adding hate crime comments to me, takes away any focus/accountability from the dubious club statement.

But why on earth is the focus even on the statement... The whole reason there was a statement is because some fans were literally chanting about a bloke dying and being cut up from head to toe. Hows that somehow become the side issue? The conversation shouldn’t be about whether the clubs PR was dubious.. it should be about how grim those chants actually were. I dont even know who Graeme is or what he does, I’ve got no dog in this fight other than saying those chants were just grim. And all this “but” this, “but” that stuff just ends up feeling like a justification of the chanting.

Rightly or Wrongly, yes i do think the chant about rudkin could meet a threshold of hate speech...I dont necessarily agree with that because I personally dont actually think there is a credible 'threat' to his life... but it could definitely be perceived that way by the authorities im sure.. Thats the point Graeme was making.

[Xen]

12 hours ago, Foxes Trust Reform said:

Disappointing to hear Graeme Smith on the When You're Smiling podcast going down the hate crime and police involvement route in response to this. Feels a bit out of touch.

 

Is this really what the fan base want from the Fan Engagement Framework and individuals on the Fan Advisory Board that are there to represent them?

 

Such a shame the Trust signed up to this nonsense and have Ian Bason as their representative playing a part in it...

 

9 hours ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Yeah my eyes rolled when I heard that. Sounded very ‘BBC’. 

That's Graeme to a T, really. Always keen to get involved with any fluff piece/token gesture the club do, and anything on the BBC, and won't do anything to jeopardise the benefits that come with those roles. Maybe he's just genuinely concerned about the level of chanting - which is an extremely valid point - but its a classic case of picking up on a very selective portion of the facts and missing the bigger picture and context. Either that or its fully intentional deflection to talk about anything other than the failures of the board. You can condemn the specific chant and the disgusting nature of it, whilst also acknowledging that it was a very limited scale and clearly not an actual threat, so using it as a straw man to talk about hate crime isn't really necessary.

 

 

The FAB was always just the club putting in yes-men to say that they're doing 'something' with the fans, but its completely ineffective. It could be a worthwhile endeavour, but the club needs to distance themselves from the appointments process and just focus on the communication/workshopping side of it. Ironically, it feels like thats exactly what the Foxes Trust - a publicly open, democratically elected group representing fans - would be perfect for instead of the FAB.

Edited 12 November 2025 by Xen

[SafewayFox]

4 minutes ago, Loxm said:

But why on earth is the focus even on the statement... The whole reason there was a statement is because some fans were literally chanting about a bloke dying and being cut up from head to toe. Hows that somehow become the side issue? The conversation shouldn’t be about whether the clubs PR was dubious.. it should be about how grim those chants actually were. I dont even know who Graeme is or what he does, I’ve got no dog in this fight other than saying those chants were just grim. And all this “but” this, “but” that stuff just ends up feeling like a justification of the chanting.

Rightly or Wrongly, yes i do think the chant about rudkin could meet a threshold of hate speech...I dont necessarily agree with that because I personally dont actually think there is a credible 'threat' to his life... but it could definitely be perceived that way by the authorities im sure.. Thats the point Graeme was making.

I think we’re oddly agreeing about it all.

 

I am not condoning the chant and it goes completely against my own values.

 

What I (and appears others) are trying to bring to the table is that the action of a handful of people that I wouldn’t likely spend time with have caused a reaction from our owners/FAB.

 

Yet when a larger percentage of fans opinions about other matters such as BC Game as a sponsor, our PSR issues (should I carry on) fall on deaf ear.

 

[Tommy G]

1 minute ago, SafewayFox said:

I think we’re oddly agreeing about it all.

 

I am not condoning the chant and it goes completely against my own values.

 

What I (and appears others) are trying to bring to the table is that the action of a handful of people that I wouldn’t likely spend time with have caused a reaction from our owners/FAB.

 

Yet when a larger percentage of fans opinions about other matters such as BC Game as a sponsor, our PSR issues (should I carry on) fall on deaf ear.

 

I think the club (and any club) have a duty to make a statement against anything as vile as those chants - given people have been put in prison for a few tweets on X recently it's no surprise and it is in vogue to make a stance about everything these days. 

 

If it was 20 people, they could find them and ban them, and let everyone else get on with it. It is all a bit OTT

[Stadt]

I think even Brock is more critical of the club than Graeme Smith - says all you need to know 

[Basingstoke Fox]

On the BSLB pod, we had a guest who:

• Rightfully called out the Glazer/Woodward rip off chant as wrong.
• Immediately identified multiple layers to the full situation and the risk of conflating these.
• Provided his opinion while articulating the relevant nuance and context further, without making sweeping statements about other groups of people.

 

On the WYS pod, we had a guest who:

• Rightfully called out the Glazer/Woodward rip off chant as wrong.
• Inexplicably claimed the anti KP chant "sell the club and **** off home" has "racist undertones".
• Provided his perspective while tarring everyone chanting the latter in the stands with the same brush as a minority chanting the former in the concourse.
• Implied that a significant portion of the LCFC away fanbase are guilty hate crimes(!) requiring police involvement as a result.

 

All of that on a podcast from the national broadcaster. No doubt anybody listening to this at best highly misinformed and at worst disingenuous perspective at face value without having been at Carrow Road would've been as shocked to hear this as Piper was.

 

Graeme and others may not like the anti KP chant, but mouthing off like this about on the national broadcaster with those implications is almost defamatory to those in the ground chanting it and is bang out of order.

[VLC86]

37 minutes ago, Basingstoke Fox said:

On the BSLB pod, we had a guest who:

• Rightfully called out the Glazer/Woodward rip off chant as wrong.
• Immediately identified multiple layers to the full situation and the risk of conflating these.
• Provided his opinion while articulating the relevant nuance and context further, without making sweeping statements about other groups of people.

 

On the WYS pod, we had a guest who:

• Rightfully called out the Glazer/Woodward rip off chant as wrong.
• Inexplicably claimed the anti KP chant "sell the club and **** off home" has "racist undertones".
• Provided his perspective while tarring everyone chanting the latter in the stands with the same brush as a minority chanting the former in the concourse.
• Implied that a significant portion of the LCFC away fanbase are guilty hate crimes(!) requiring police involvement as a result.

 

All of that on a podcast from the national broadcaster. No doubt anybody listening to this at best highly misinformed and at worst disingenuous perspective at face value without having been at Carrow Road would've been as shocked to hear this as Piper was.

 

Graeme and others may not like the anti KP chant, but mouthing off like this about on the national broadcaster with those implications is almost defamatory to those in the ground chanting it and is bang out of order.

Why are you assuming that those who disagreed with the chants, and the potential for that to be perceived as racist, don’t like chants about King Power out?

 

You can be very much against the absolute shambles our club has become in the last 5 years, completely disagree with the clubs laughable statement about acting with integrating while condemning chants which could be perceived to have racist undertones.

[Loxm]

55 minutes ago, Basingstoke Fox said:

Implied that a significant portion of the LCFC away fanbase are guilty hate crimes(!) requiring police involvement as a result.

Your post would have been great if it was actually true.... He did not suggest a 'significant portion' of fans were guilty of hate crimes, nor did he say it 'required' involvement from the police. He simply said it could meet a threshold if the police did decide to take action.

 

If I am wrong, and I could well be, I would welcome a timestamp from the pod of when he did say those things? 

Like with most things in this fanbase, it seems according to some that we can only be on one extreme side or the other and it has to be completely polarising??? I agree with the comment from VLC where he says "You can be very much against the absolute shambles our club has become in the last 5 years, completely disagree with the clubs laughable statement about acting with integrating while condemning chants which could be perceived to have racist undertones."

 

I've seen countless posts on here and online that 'suggest' if you condemn the chants you apparently are in support of the regime - that is surface level thick analysis at its' best!

[Jackubu]

57 minutes ago, VLC86 said:

Why are you assuming that those who disagreed with the chants, and the potential for that to be perceived as racist, don’t like chants about King Power out?

I can tell you Graeme thinks this. I had a lengthy debate with him on this, probably poorly articulated from my side. But in essence he labelled all KPFC chants in the same bracket and so did others such as the Brock. They think they're above other fans. 

[foxinsocks]

1 minute ago, Jackubu said:

I can tell you Graeme thinks this. I had a lengthy debate with him on this, probably poorly articulated from my side. But in essence he labelled all KPFC chants in the same bracket and so did others such as the Brock. They think they're above other fans. 

Just to say it is not KP that own the club - it is Top's family and the Chinese fella.  It could be that some racists don't like the owners.  Yet it could be tat some people who are not racists think the owners are allowing the club to go to pot.  It cant be that ALL fans expecting better from the owners ... or wanting new ownrers...are racists.  If Graeme things this he is wrong.
For me it is clear we need a rebuild of the squad - Rudkins use of money his very inefficient (eg: skip et al) so surely they can see that he is not the DOF for the job.  If they cant see this and sort it then thery need to look at themselves.  I says Top - grow some and get a DOF whom can rebuild the club.

[VLC86]

6 minutes ago, Jackubu said:

I can tell you Graeme thinks this. I had a lengthy debate with him on this, probably poorly articulated from my side. But in essence he labelled all KPFC chants in the same bracket and so did others such as the Brock. They think they're above other fans. 

He can come on and speak for himself on his own views, I’m not going to get into a discussion about him on a public forum when I’ve done it in private many times. I was purely saying that labelling people as KPFC for stating that the songs sang crossed the line isn’t right.

[Jackubu]

26 minutes ago, foxinsocks said:

Just to say it is not KP that own the club - it is Top's family and the Chinese fella. 

Aye but for as long as they're here a collecting King Power is always easier. Not overly important 

[Cincinnati Fox]

Is it illegal to hate someone in the UK?

 

surely given what top and Jon Rudkin has done over the last 5-8 years it fair to expect that Leicester fans hate them.

 

they are destroying our club and he is saying it’s a hate crime if you want them out?

 

[lcfcfem]

5 minutes ago, Cincinnati Fox said:

Is it illegal to hate someone in the UK?

 

surely given what top and Jon Rudkin has done over the last 5-8 years it fair to expect that Leicester fans hate them.

 

they are destroying our club and he is saying it’s a hate crime if you want them out?

 

No it’s a hate crime if you chant about wanting someone dead and how to do it. We know it’s football and it’s chants and know there are other clubs  done it but it is wrong, particularly in today’s society. It took that chant to cross the line. I don’t think they can clamp down on the rest of the chants 

Edited 12 November 2025 by lcfcfem

[Stadt]

2 minutes ago, lcfcfem said:

No it’s a hate crime if you chant about wanting someone dead and how to do it. We know it’s football and it’s chants and know there are other clubs  done it but it is wrong, particularly in today’s society. It took that chant to cross the line. I don’t think they can clamp down on the rest of the chants 

That's not what a hate crime is.