Jamesino_LCFC Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 It seem to me every unsuccessful manager has a player(s) every fan knows is God awful, but due to stubborness/stupidity etc. will carry on playing!! Peter Taylor: Junior Lewis , Akinbiyi. Micky Adams: James Scowcroft (on the right) Craig Levein: DeVries, Sylla Kelly already has this ability to pick players not playing very well; Joey, Maybury, Hughes (on the wing) I just hope this will not continue into next year!!! Well Rob Kelly is the man who is seeing them on the training pitch day in day out and I think the team he picks (he thinks) is the ones who are performing best on the training pitch, however the training pitch and an actual match are two seperate worlds. If I had to say, I would almost certainly say Danny Tiatto as Rob seems to have lots of faith in him, but he (Tiatto) definetly isnt the answer in my opinion.
BartonFox Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 Thracian... for whipping people up into a "kelly out" frenzy. He and Barton had made their minds up about him after ONE game last year. They are so desperate to be proved corrrect. Your missing the bigger picture Babylon, I don't believe RK is good enough, but I will be forever grateful for steering us away from relegation. However that doesn't make him immune to valid criticism; but in all fairness it doesn't help the fellow when he is set up to fail. The real problems are Dim Tim and Ronald McDonald. Did you hear Birch say last night RK is over his salary budget for this season? It was right at the start of the show and it got swept away sharpish, that is not a good sign. Kelly has his lot, he 'claims' to be happy with it but when the team is clearly unfit and lacking any kind of attacking prowess he can't expect a free ride. Not one person has been able to offer a counter arguement to valid points raised by many here. People saying Reading lost their first game is not the answer to our problems.
BartonFox Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 For a team that won 5-0 they haven't half had the piss taken. No, it is you that everyone is taking the piss out of
Ric Flair Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 Your missing the bigger picture Babylon, I don't believe RK is good enough, but I will be forever grateful for steering us away from relegation. However that doesn't make him immune to valid criticism; but in all fairness it doesn't help the fellow when he is set up to fail. The real problems are Dim Tim and Ronald McDonald. Did you hear Birch say last night RK is over his salary budget for this season? It was right at the start of the show and it got swept away sharpish, that is not a good sign. Kelly has his lot, he 'claims' to be happy with it but when the team is clearly unfit and lacking any kind of attacking prowess he can't expect a free ride. Not one person has been able to offer a counter arguement to valid points raised by many here. People saying Reading lost their first game is not the answer to our problems. It amazes me that signing 4 players (2 of whom won't be on anymore than £2000 per week) on free transfers, releasing 2 players before their contracts expired and 2 players going who's contracts had expired has still led to us going over our transfer/salary budget for this season. How can this be possible? The club hasn't even spent much money in the past few years, where's it all going? I know you know, I want to know though. The board are morons, I want them out.
shen Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 It amazes me that signing 4 players (2 of whom won't be on anymore than £2000 per week) on free transfers, releasing 2 players before their contracts expired and 2 players going who's contracts had expired has still led to us going over our transfer/salary budget for this season. How can this be possible? The club hasn't even spent much money in the past few years, where's it all going? I know you know, I want to know though. The board are morons, I want them out. The salary budget could well have been further reduced following the end of the parachute payments and reduced attendance expectancies...
Ric Flair Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 The salary budget could well have been further reduced following the end of the parachute payments and reduced attendance expectancies... Yes, but this should all be taken in to account well in advance like they claim to be doing and the Foxes_Trust claim is being done. But then you hear stuff like this and it does make you wonder. It's time there was a massive overhaul at this club again, but our current board of directors aren't going to want to find anyone to seriously invest/take over this club as it will mean their ridiculously high salaries will be exposed and why on earth would they want to do that. If a slag of a club like Derby, Coventry and Southampton can get investors to throw money in to them when they are seriously in debt then I cannot believe we can't.
Manwell Pablo Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 The salary budget could well have been further reduced following the end of the parachute payments and reduced attendance expectancies... As Ric said this was done, and cutbacks have been made. Since Levein went ( who reportadly slashed our wage bill by 5 million ) Kelly has made further cut backs, getting rid of Morris, (signed by adams $$$) Hamill and Gerrbrand, as well as Joey leaving (signed by adams $$$). He also saved 6 Months worth of De Vries wages, and he got rid of Dublin ( signed by Adams $$$$) you'd think we could afford the wages of WBA and Southampton Rejects and two League Two players. I must admit thinking about it is quite worrying. I knew we didnt have any money but hearing we were "over budget" last night was a bit of a shock.
Ric Flair Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 As Ric said this was done, and cutbacks have been made. Since Levein went ( who reportadly slashed our wage bill by 5 million ) Kelly has made further cut backs, getting rid of Morris, (signed by adams $$$) Hamill and Gerrbrand, as well as Joey leaving (signed by adams $$$). He also saved 6 Months worth of De Vries wages, and he got rid of Dublin ( signed by Adams $$$$) you'd think we could afford the wages of WBA and Southampton Rejects and two League Two players. I must admit thinking about it is quite worrying. I knew we didnt have any money but hearing we were "over budget" last night was a bit of a shock. Also, we have used that extra million from Connolly, but not on transfers so there's another bonus million that had it not come in what would have happened? I know we had to pay Levein and his cronies off but if you think about it. Back at the start of last season, Levein and the board wanted to keep Connolly and would happily have done so if he would have agreed to. However he didn;t, so we sold him for £2 million upfront (money that was a bonus again as we must have budgeted to not have to sell anyone for that amount of money) we then spent £500k on Hume and £250k upfront on Hammond, leaving a further £1.25 million. If we be generous here we could say that that £1.25 million paid for Fryatt and paid Levein and his staff off when they were bounced out. So again there should be no fall out financially for having to bin Levein, etc. Infact we are still over a million up from this time last season on this Connolly deal. Surely keeping Connolly and the rest of the squad at the start of last season wasn't a last chance saloon and they were going for broke on promotion with that side? Now that opens another can of worms because Levein and the board said they had a 3 year plan. But surely the 2nd year of it wasn't nailed on promotion and if it wasn't then how could they honestly think they could make progression in the 3rd year with the finances in the state they are in now if you take everything in to account. It seems to me that if Connolly hadn't gone when he did, then this club would be screwed. But it's amazing that they wanted him to stay given what they are now saying about our finances. Does that make sense? To me it's frightening.
Thracian Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 No, it is you that everyone is taking the piss out of I shan't worry then.
BartonFox Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 Here is the thing, and this is discussed by Board members when the FT are not around (which is why they double in investment to get in on the show), they all believed that we'd be Premier League after season 1, there was no budget planning for this season, the one without parachute payments. Then we cocked that up so they figured we'd be up last season, but just to be sure we got rid of Gillespie, Walker plus others and that slashed their 5 million off the balance sheet. But when it hit Christmas and we hit the bottom 3 their collective scphinter went and they suddenly realised that we were not going up and we'd be 7 million shy this season, plus the drop in ST sales etc... They have not seeked outside investment because they all arrogantly figured we'd be back in the big time by now and they could recoup their 'investments'. Now they all sit in the Boardroom, soiling themselves and shaking like frightened kittens because it has dawned on them the shit is about to hit the fan big time and this time football will make sure we are finished. Also they know that the fans are slowly working it out and when enough click in all hell will break loose on match days. Leicester Fosse AFC
Ric Flair Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 Here is the thing, and this is discussed by Board members when the FT are not around (which is why they double in investment to get in on the show), they all believed that we'd be Premier League after season 1, there was no budget planning for this season, the one without parachute payments. Then we cocked that up so they figured we'd be up last season, but just to be sure we got rid of Gillespie, Walker plus others and that slashed their 5 million off the balance sheet. But when it hit Christmas and we hit the bottom 3 their collective scphinter went and they suddenly realised that we were not going up and we'd be 7 million shy this season, plus the drop in ST sales etc... They have not seeked outside investment because they all arrogantly figured we'd be back in the big time by now and they could recoup their 'investments'. Now they all sit in the Boardroom, soiling themselves and shaking like frightened kittens because it has dawned on them the shit is about to hit the fan big time and this time football will make sure we are finished. Also they know that the fans are slowly working it out and when enough click in all hell will break loose on match days. Leicester Fosse AFC You are probably right, but I still can't see how this club is over it's wage budget. We have sold 4000 more season tickets than Coventry and are probably nearly on par with the top clubs for season ticket sales, etc. So I just don't see how we're so financially bollocksed, but I suppose with poor budgeting and planning then it's easily done.
BartonFox Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 You are probably right, but I still can't see how this club is over it's wage budget. We have sold 4000 more season tickets than Coventry and are probably nearly on par with the top clubs for season ticket sales, etc. So I just don't see how we're so financially bollocksed, but I suppose with poor budgeting and planning then it's easily done. Doesn't matter a hoot if we sold 15000 more than the SBS, all that matters is we are so poor we don't even have a pot to be potless. What they don't get is this (and to a degree Thracian has a point about kids), we know the squad isn't good enough all we want is a team that will fight for every second of the 90, and not roll over meekly a la Saturday and at leas give it a go to win the game. If that means using 'kids' who despite the knocks will carry on trying to do it for 90 minutes week in week out then the Leicester football supporting public will get behind them. Also by dropping the prices more would show up and because they are 'kids' the wages are less. Football crowds back the underdog, and if the experience on a matchday is turned back to the fans, the Club would rake it in. We don't need to be patronised by Smashie and Birchenall or Henry and his horn or clapping the sodding ball boys and the programme sellers.
Head Honcho Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 His downfall will be due to poor results, indifferent displays and eventually the fans.
Phube Posted 8 August 2006 Author Posted 8 August 2006 His downfall will be due to poor results, indifferent displays and eventually the fans. Ahhh, but these two point woill be brought about by his insistence on playing player not playing well, nes pas!!
Babylon Posted 8 August 2006 Posted 8 August 2006 Not one person has been able to offer a counter arguement to valid points raised by many here. Because we all think what you and Thracian are saying is correct to a degree. The footballing points made always seem to be taken that bit too far IMO, which is what people are arguing about. I couldn't agree more with you about the boardroom stuff.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.