Milan Mandaric's plans for the club

[Chandler]

you'll find, if THE LEGEND THAT IS CHANDLER ( ) sticks round, that he doesn't like answering difficult questions, such as my request to prove that he was once a big noise in the LCFC boardroom. that remains unproven.

Pre senile dementia setting in Stez? I stated that I had inherited a significant holding in LCFC many decades ago and that I had to dispose of it because of a financial problem.

The problem was blonde, er 38 24 26 and could detect printers ink on a £5 bill within a radius of five miles.

[Babylon]

Pre senile dementia setting in Stez? I stated that I had inherited a significant holding in LCFC many decades ago and that I had to dispose of it because of a financial problem.

The problem was blonde, er 38 24 26 and could detect printers ink on a £5 bill within a radius of five miles.

So did I

[stez]

Pre senile dementia setting in Stez? I stated that I had inherited a significant holding in LCFC many decades ago and that I had to dispose of it because of a financial problem.

The problem was blonde, er 38 24 26 and could detect printers ink on a £5 bill within a radius of five miles.

not to me you didn't

[Chandler]

not to me you didn't

I was too young to sit on the board when I inherited the shares. And to be serious for a mo I sold them so I could go into business.

All I'll say for now is that my dad and Len Shipman were good mates. They used to take pot shots at each other through the leylandii.

[Kilworthfox]

OK, so I was really....really.....bored at work a couple of weeks ago, around the time when the Trust were e-mailing their members for opinions on ground sharing, and I and e-mailed the Football league to see what their stance was on ground sharing. This was their reply.....

We are in receipt of your communication.

We cannot however comment on matters involving other clubs as these are private contractual matters between the clubs concerned, the rugby clubs with whom they share grounds and The Football League.

Football League Regulation 13.5, introduced in Season 2005/6, state "Except where a Club seeks consent to enter into a ground-sharing agreement with another Club, it shall be a condition of any such consent that the ground-sharing agreement shall contain provision to ensure that the playing of any of the Club's first team matches will always take precedence over the activities of the other party to the agreement."

Typical legal wording, but if I understand it correctly, the FL will only allow ground sharing if the other party (the Tigers) agree to move their fixtures every time there is a clash. How likely is it that the RFU will allow that when the Tigers have already got their own ground?

I thought that football leauge rules were that a leauge club would have to own 60% of its ground in a groundshare therefore another club would only be able to buy 40% that would be left over.

The teams that do groundshare most if not all teams rugby & football are owned by the same people.

wigan

QPR & wasps

[stez]

I was too young to sit on the board when I inherited the shares. And to be serious for a mo I sold them so I could go into business.

All I'll say for now is that my dad and Len Shipman were good mates. They used to take pot shots at each other through the leylandii.

fair play to you.

re. the leylandii, they'd suing over lost land and light now!

[Hullfox]

When you come up with a thread that attracts half as much attention as this one Swiss Fox then you can tell me to bog off to the General Section. And if you really are as bored as you claim to be by my scoop why are you still on this thread?

In fairness Mr C, Swiss started off a great thread if I remember correctly on 9/11 conspiracies which attracted much attention. General Chat I know but he managed to keep the discussion going without resorting to personal insults.

I'm sure I've said it before but I think you make some corking points but the insults you throw mean that people see only those and not the thought provoking stuff.

[MC Prussian]

Chandler, I've already congratulated you for this unique thread and I mean it that way. Honestly. No false intentions behind it. It's great to see that you really care about this club, but don't ridicule others. Doesn't make you "better".

Whenever you come up with those odd claims, f.eg. that Beckham's future has a direct influence on Leicester City, I somewhat doubt your mental state. No offense here, as I'm only judging you from your written comments. But where and how do you make those connections?

I'm not a member of FT in order to get rid of all my angry feelings or because I feel like trolling or insulting other members. I like discussions. That's it.

Heated arguments are alright as long as we can keep the focus on the original topic.

Do you agree with me, Chandler?

[Smudge]

I somewhat doubt your mental state. No offense here,

None taken eh Chandler??? :pinch: Amazing!!

[Ashley]

Why do people have to spoil it ?

first good thing thats happend to the club in years and people moaning about it talk about being fickle in a post the other week

[Swedging]

because they're not actually shareholders just like you are.

He's not now. And I reckon a few people on this forum have also been shareholders...

[MC Prussian]

He's not now. And I reckon a few people on this forum have also been shareholders...

Thanks for the hint. Edit completed.

[Milan]

That first post is really good reading but eh if that is the case then so what. Without Mandaric it is likely that we will be wide open in terms of relegation. A title bid sounds good, we all know that football will implode like a dark star one day so lets enjoy it while we can. They'll always be a core Leicester Fanbase that will be willing to start this club from scratch, so before anyone gets too worried 'supporters are not owned by anyone'.